545230

research-article2014
QIXXXX10.1177/1077800414545230Qualitative InquiryTraver and Duran

Article
Qualitative Inquiry

Dancing Around (Dis)Ability: How

2014, Vol. 20(10) 1148­–1156
© The Author(s) 2014
Reprints and permissions:
Nondisabled Girls Are Affected by sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/1077800414545230

Participation in a Dance Program qix.sagepub.com

for Girls With Disabilities

Amy E. Traver1 and John Duran1

Abstract
In this article, we heed lessons from Laurel Richardson’s After a Fall: A Sociomedical Sojourn to investigate how nondisabled
high school–aged girls are affected by their volunteer experiences in Believe Ballet, a nonprofit organization that provides
primary- and secondary-school-aged girls with physical disabilities with the opportunity to dance and perform ballet.
Drawing on a qualitative content analysis of three academic years of volunteers’ pre- and post-participation questionnaires,
this article focuses specifically on changes in volunteers’ self-reported perceptions of disability and ability. This article also
points to directions for future research in the fields of disability, feminist disability, and ableism studies.

Keywords
disabilities, abilities, gender, volunteerism

Believe Ballet is a nonprofit organization that provides pri-
mary- and secondary-school-aged girls with disabilities
with the opportunity to dance and perform ballet.1 The radi-
cal message of this effort—that beauty resides in girls’ dif-
ferences and abilities—echoes loudly every May when,
after an academic year of weekly hour-long practice ses-
sions, the dancers perform to a packed recital hall.
Standing behind each dancer at that recital is a high
school–aged girl: A nondisabled volunteer who committed
herself equally to the program each week. Wearing black to
the younger girls’ pink, she helps her assigned dancer make
the arm and leg movements that, without her consistent
presence and physical support, might not otherwise be pos-
sible. At a developmental moment when many young
women struggle with specifically gendered forms of what
Connell (2009, p. 66) refers to as “social embodiment”
(Kimmel, 2004; Thorne, 1999), this female high school–
aged volunteer has made room for the difference and dance
of another.
In this article, we heed lessons from Richardson’s (2013)
After a Fall: A Sociomedical Sojourn, which illustrates how
proximity to disability can impact one’s sense of embodi-
ment and understanding of ableism, to investigate the ways
in which Believe Ballet’s volunteers are affected by their
experience(s) in the program. Drawing on a qualitative con-
tent analysis of three academic years of volunteers’ pre- and
post-participation questionnaires, we focus specifically on
changes in volunteers’ self-reported perceptions of disability
and ability. In doing so, we both add to the disability studies
and feminist disability studies literatures and begin “to shift
the gaze of contemporary scholarship away from the spot-
light on disability to a more nuanced exploration of episte-
mologies and ontologies of ableism” (Campbell, 2008, p. 1).
Background
Believe Ballet is located in a large city on the east coast of
the United States. It was founded by a pediatric physical
therapist in 2002 to provide therapeutic exercise through
dance to five elementary-school-aged girls with Erb’s palsy
(or Erb-Duchenne palsy) or cerebral palsy.2 The organiza-
tion has since expanded to include more than 50 female
dancers, aged 3- to 18-years-old, who are diagnosed with a
range of physical disabilities and are typically excluded
from traditional ballet programs.
Believe Ballet’s efforts unfold each week of the aca-
demic year through small, staggered dance classes. Class
placement is determined by a dancer’s age, not her (dis)
abilities or preferred style of dance. Dancers’ participation
in each class is informed by three programmatic goals:
1
City University of New York, New York City, USA
Corresponding Author:
Amy E. Traver, Queensborough Community College, City University of
New York, 222-05 56th Avenue, Bayside, NY 11364, USA.
Email: ATraver@qcc.cuny.edu
Traver and Duran 1149
acquisition of developmental skills through the use of
movement; development of independence and social inte-
gration through recreation; and realization of creativity and
self-confidence through artistic expression. The culmina-
tion of the year’s classwork is the program’s annual spring
recital, which serves to showcase the dancers’ physical
achievements and abilities, as well as the pleasures they
find in performance.
The growth and success of Believe Ballet rests heavily
on the more than 40 female high school–aged volunteers
who also commit themselves to the program each year.
These volunteers are drawn from neighborhoods within and
around the city in which Believe Ballet is located, and they
are diverse along such variables as age, race/ethnicity, and
type of high school attending (i.e., public, private, or paro-
chial). The nature and breadth of volunteers’ personal expe-
riences with dance and/or disability also vary.
Each volunteer is paired with one dancer for the course
of the academic year. Together they study the exercises and
ballet movements that ground the dancer’s recital perfor-
mance, as well as her physical development more broadly.
In most pairings, the dancer’s performance and develop-
ment require the active physical support of her volunteer
partner. As a result, both the dancer and the volunteer take
center stage at the annual spring recital.
Theoretical Framework
In After a Fall: A Sociomedical Sojourn, Richardson (2013)
writes from her position as a woman facing a temporary
non-life-threatening mobility disability. Employing an
autoethnographic style, she connects her experiences with
medical practitioners, loved ones, caregivers, and other
individuals with disabilities to many of the themes central
to the disability studies literature: the ways in which dis-
abilities are both embodied and socially constructed; the
relational construction of ability and disability; the intersec-
tions of disability and other social inequalities, like gender;
and disability and carework. Given their centrality, these
themes also ground the theoretical framework for our study
of Believe Ballet.
Disability scholars argue that disabilities are both
embodied and socially constructed. For example, Barton
(1998) makes the distinction between impairment, that is, a
lack in part or mechanism of the body, and disability, that is,
the disadvantages or restrictions caused by the organization
of society and incurred by people who have impairments.
As defined, impairment is understood as an embodied con-
dition or characteristic of the individual, whereas disability
is understood as a feature and function of the social world.
Significantly, much of the contemporary scholarship in dis-
ability studies has focused on the latter; on the socio-cul-
tural (Wendell, 2006), legal (Campbell, 2001), economic
(Chouinard, 1997), and political inequalities (Wolbring,
2008) that map onto impairments, as well as the disabling
social interactions and contexts that shape the lives of indi-
viduals with impairments (Donaldson, 1980; Fine & Asch,
1988). Of interest, however, are recent efforts to, in the
words of Snyder and Mitchell (2001), “re-(engage) the
body” (p. 367) in disability studies. Grounded in the anti-
dualism of poststructuralism and the experiential orienta-
tion of phenomenology, these efforts marry the individual
and the social by defining the body as “the key domain in
which struggles over power and control are contested”
(Hughes, 2004, p. 66).
One important element of these efforts is the recognition
that bodies materialize through social discourse (Price &
Shildrick, 2002). In disability studies, this recognition is
best expressed via interrogation of the “interdependent and
intertwined” concepts of disability and ability (Inahara,
2009, p. 56). According to Campbell (1999), “‘disability’ is
a profoundly relational construct . . . (that) obtains its mean-
ing through its relationship to the Other, that which it is not”
(p. 77). For Campbell (2001), this Other is ability or, more
specifically, ableism: “a network of beliefs, processes and
practices that produces a particular kind of self and body
(the corporeal standard) that is projected as the perfect, spe-
cies-typical and therefore essential and fully human” (p.
44). For Inahara (2009), this Other is an ideal of “fixity and
wholeness,” of “simplicity” and “sameness” (pp. 57-59).
For Garland-Thomson (1997), this Other is the normate:
“the abstract, unmarked, disembodied” “subject of democ-
racy” (pp. 80, 136).
Garland-Thomson’s (1997) creation and use of the more
general “normate” is instructive in that it reaches beyond
ability to extend and liken disability to other relational
inequalities in American society. In similar fashion,
scholars have long linked and likened constructions of
disability to constructions of race/racism (Asch, 2004;
Campbell, 2008; Garland-Thomson, 2004), heteronorma-
tivity (McReuer, 2002), and sexism (Asch, 2004; Campbell,
2009; Gerschick, 2000; Wolbring, 2008). Most relevant to
our research is work that connects disability studies and
gender studies. According to Garland-Thomson (2004),
given the “many parallels that exist between the social
meaning attributed to female bodies and those assigned to
disabled bodies” (p. 19), these connections often stem from
a shared focus on embodiment and normalization.
One exciting result of this shared focus is a new area of
study: feminist disability studies. Moving beyond the use of
disability “as a metaphor for women’s oppression,” a rhetori-
cal device that engages “an ableist perception of disability as
a despised condition that should be prevented or eliminated,”
feminist disability studies interrogates the terms and limits of
our “understand(ing) of human diversity, the materiality of
the body, multiculturalism, and the social formations that
interpret bodily difference” (Garland-Thomson, 2004, p. 74;
Hall, 2002, p. x). In this way, it also encourages the critical
1150 Qualitative Inquiry 20(10)
reexamination and potentially liberating expansion of both
disability studies and gender studies.
An example of this can be found in the feminist disabil-
ity studies’ scholarship on carework. Centrally situated in
each area of study, carework illustrates the often-contradic-
tory orientations of the individual disability studies and
gender studies perspectives. For example, Garland-
Thomson (2001) argues that the “liberal ideology of auton-
omy and independence that fuels the broader impulse
toward women’s empowerment” tends to ignore the “needs
and accommodations that disabled women’s bodies require”
(p. 6). From a similarly illustrative, if not contrary, stand-
point, Garland-Thomson (2001) also describes how “the
controversial feminist ethic of care . . . has been criticized
by feminist disability scholars for undermining symmetrical
reciprocal relations among disabled and nondisabled
women” (p. 5). By simultaneously acknowledging the
necessity (Galler, 2006), inequalities (Hillyer, 1993), and
“interrelationality” (Campbell, 2001, p. 46) of carework,
feminist disability studies scholars complicate acts and
analyses of care. They also connect experiences of disabil-
ity, gender, and carework to larger conversations about indi-
viduality (Goble, 2004), rights and subjectivity
(Garland-Thomson, 2004), control and strength (Fine &
Asch, 1988), and self-mastery, freedom, and independence
(Campbell, 2001).
Method
This study’s participants included volunteers from three
academic years of Believe Ballet programming between
2009 and 2012. Each of these years engaged an average of
48 volunteers, some of whom were repeat volunteers, with
116 unique volunteers during the time of the study. Seventy-
three of these individuals consented to participate in the
study and complete both pre- and post-participation ques-
tionnaires for at least 1 year of their participation in the pro-
gram. Given the design of Believe Ballet, all study
participants were female.3
We asked the study participants to complete open-ended
pre- and post-participation questionnaires. The pre-partici-
pation questions included items about prior contact with
individuals with disabilities and expectations about the pro-
gram. The post-participation questions included items per-
taining to their experiences in the program.4
We examined volunteers’ open-ended responses on the
pre- and post-participation questionnaires using qualitative
content analysis, which begins with a
“count” of textual elements . . . [that] provide[s] a means for
identifying, organizing, indexing, and retrieving data. Analysis
of the data once organized according to certain content
elements [then] involve[s] consideration of the literal words in
the text being analyzed. (Berg, 2001, p. 242)
Although inductively generated, the content elements or
codes constructed and used in this analysis did not emerge
in a vacuum. Theory no doubt primed our search for recur-
rent patterns or paradoxes in volunteer’s responses to the
questionnaires, and theory almost certainly affected which
data patterns or anomalies we deemed interesting and/or
important. To control for this dialectical interplay, we made
every effort to allow our “data to speak as loudly as the
theories” (Snow, Morrill, & Anderson, 2003, p. 193), using
broad or inclusive codes that allowed for multiple associa-
tions within and across the questionnaires.5
In the next section, we present the findings of our quali-
tative content analysis. Although a number of content ele-
ments or codes emerged from that analysis, we focus on
those that relate to volunteers’ most frequently referenced
category of impact: perceptions of disability and ability.
Consistent with selective coding, we have used these data to
construct a larger story about the effects of girls’ interac-
tions across physical (dis)abilities (Punch, 2005). In doing
so, we hope to both add to and qualify the theories—or, in
Richardson’s words (2007), “stories” (p. 927)—that framed
this work.
Perceptions of Disability and Ability
The most frequently referenced impact of participation in
Believe Ballet was a change in volunteers’ perceptions of
disability and ability. For many volunteers, this change was
a multilayered phenomena: one that led to an increased
awareness of the existence and experiences of individuals
with physical disabilities; moved through a grappling with
constructions of physical ability and disability; encouraged
an acceptance of and appreciation for body diversity; and
produced a sense of communion and social responsibility
across (dis)abilities.
Becoming More Aware of the Existence and
Experiences of Individuals With Physical
Disabilities
For many volunteers, Believe Ballet provided the setting for
their first intimate contact with individuals with physical
disabilities. For example, when asked to describe their level
of contact with individuals with physical disabilities prior
to their participation in the program, many volunteers
claimed that they had “not had any experience” or that they
“haven’t had much exposure.” Many others described a
limited or moderate level of contact that was facilitated dur-
ing structured interactions at work or school: “I’ve been
exposed to people with physical challenges in middle
school. Although they were separated academically, in
extracurriculars [sic] they joined us.” In addition, volun-
teers often realized this moderate level of contact by proxy,
Traver and Duran 1151
through family members. For example, quite a few volun-
teers attributed their contact with individuals with visible
physical disabilities (and/or individuals who used mobility
aids) to a parent’s professional status or career: “My mother
works in a nursing home and many people there are in
wheelchairs.” Only a small number of volunteers refer-
enced prolonged and/or intimate contact with individuals
with visible physical disabilities prior to their participation
in the program. In fact, it was relatively uncommon for a
volunteer to indicate that she had a close family member or
a good friend with physical disabilities, and only two volun-
teers described themselves as having personally experi-
enced their own physical challenges.
For those volunteers with limited or moderate prior con-
tact, Believe Ballet’s weekly hour-long meetings made
them more aware of the existence and experiences of indi-
viduals with physical disabilities. For many volunteers, this
awareness occurred at a very general level: “(Believe
Ballet) made me more aware of life and of people.” For oth-
ers, this awareness emerged as recognition of embodied and
experiential difference: “(Believe Ballet) showed me peo-
ple’s differences and made me aware,” and “(Believe Ballet)
made me more aware of the different conditions in other
people’s lives.” For still others, this awareness focused on
the struggles that seemed to map onto these differences:
“(Believe Ballet made) me more aware of challenges peo-
ple have to face,” and “Previous to this experience, I didn’t
realize how difficult it was for others.”
Grappling With Constructions of Physical Ability
and Disability
For many volunteers, this increased awareness led to the
development of a new life perspective: “(Believe Ballet)
changed the way I view people in the world and being less
unaware.” Most often, this new perspective was born of a
grappling with constructions of ability and disability. For
example, through their participation in the program, quite a
few volunteers developed a new outlook on their own phys-
ical abilities: “I have learned a lot about peoples’ differ-
ences. I am more aware of how many children suffer from
physical challenges and am extremely appreciative of what
I have and what I can do.” For these volunteers, proximity
to physical disability made them both more aware of and
thankful for their own able-bodiment: “I appreciate all of
the abilities I have,” and “I am grateful for having a fully
proper working body.” In other words, while participation
in Believe Ballet made many volunteers more mindful of
disability and ability, it didn’t necessarily challenge them to
think differently about either. Instead, in fairly typical and
normative terms, these volunteers framed physical disabil-
ity and ability as matters of misfortune or luck, respectively:
“I have learned to be more . . . considerate of the challenges
that others are faced with. I’ve realized how lucky I am.”
Yet, for other volunteers, this grappling bore a different
“new” perspective on physical disability and ability; one
centered on the critical examination of disability/ability as
mutually exclusive, mutually constitutive constructions. At
times, this perspective emerged as a type of self-reflection,
a coming-to-terms with how they perceived individuals
with physical disabilities before and after their participation
in Believe Ballet: “At first I thought I should be more cau-
tious and careful with handicapped kids but (then) I realized
they are just like me.” Significantly, these reflections tended
to draw on notions of “similarity” and “difference.” For
those volunteers who developed this perspective, similar
experiences, either in dance or with friends, took prece-
dence over difference in their relationships with dancers:
“Since Believe Ballet I have . . . realized that we are more
alike than different.” For others, differences in ability were
acknowledged but redefined as insignificant to these same
relationships: “This was my first experience with girls with
physical disabilities and it has changed my outlook. I’ve
found ways to relate with them despite any supposed ‘dif-
ferences’ between us.”
Significantly, in both cases, volunteers evidenced a
developing sense that physical disability and ability are
more than embodied realities; they are also constructions—
often of similarity and difference—that take shape and
change through interaction. In this spirit, many of the vol-
unteers who developed this more critical perspective came
to question why physical ability and disability were con-
structed as mutually exclusive poles: “I have a different per-
spective and realize that handicapped people have a lot
more abilities than people give them credit for.” Likewise,
many came to describe physical ability/disability as a con-
tinuum: “Believe Ballet has exposed me to the range of
capabilities and talents that these girls have.” Or, con-
versely, but to similar effect, to disregard the continuum
entirely:
(Believe Ballet) has helped me reinstate the fact that physical
abilities and disabilities do not define people. The girl I work
with is not able to walk on her own, yet we are able to carry out
a full conversation and she is only 6 years old.
Accepting and Appreciating Body Diversity
For the volunteers who engaged a more critical stance on
constructions of ability and disability, this perspective
seemed to yield equally personal effects: “Since (Believe
Ballet) . . . I was able to let myself feel free and open, and
therefore able to achieve more.” In these cases, freedom and
openness were experienced at the level of the body, through
an increased acceptance and appreciation of body diversity:
“Believe Ballet has made me appreciate my own physical
differences and other peoples’ differences.”
One concept that was frequently used as an axis for this
acceptance and appreciation was “perfect.” Although some
1152 Qualitative Inquiry 20(10)
volunteers reported an expanded definition of perfection, a
sense that “everyone is perfect in their own way,” it was
more common for volunteers to abandon the concept
entirely: “Believe Ballet has made me realize that no one is
perfect and everyone has something unique about them,”
and “Believe Ballet has made me realize that no one is per-
fect.” Two interrelated shifts in foci appeared central to this
abandon. The first is a new focus on the efforts of the body:
“From seeing these girls struggle each week but still have
so much fun, I have learned that everything does not have to
be perfect as long as it is my best.” The second is a new
focus on effort as a means to beauty: “Believe Ballet showed
me that everything does not have to be done perfectly, as
long as you try your hardest it will be beautiful.”
While consistent with the grappling introduced earlier,
this recognition and re-evaluation of effort reframes the
physical ability/disability continuum in a way that poten-
tially privileges physical difference. For example, some
volunteers wrote of a new respect for the strengths and
creative potential of body diversity: “Now I think of mul-
tiple ways to solve a situation instead of trying one way
and I think of how the girls would resolve it if they were
in the same situation.” In fact, it was this sense that the
dancers were active embodied subjects—rather than pas-
sive embodied objects—that seemed to really affect volun-
teers: “(Believe Ballet) has given me a new perspective,
not only on people with physical challenges but also on all
people. I also have a great appreciation for what our bod-
ies are capable of.”
Communing Across (Dis)Abilities
For many volunteers, Believe Ballet not only provided the
setting for their first intimate contact with individuals with
physical disabilities but also provided the setting for their
first opportunity to actively cultivate and bear witness to the
success of another: “Every hour I spend with Julia shows
more and more improvement [sic]. I know I have truly
helped her.” For some volunteers, this opportunity became
evidence of a developing responsible self: “Working with
my dancer has made me realize that I am someone she
depends on. What I do and say impacts her physically and
emotionally. I enjoy being someone that she can rely on.”
For others, it facilitated new feelings of competence and
confidence: “Believe Ballet showed me that I can make a
difference in someone’s life, and that has made me more
confident in my abilities.” In either case, volunteers
expressed a sense of surprise at the extent to which they
could help and matter to another—“I honestly didn’t think
I’d ever make a difference in anyone’s life, but I did”—at
such a young age: “Although just a teenager, I am making a
difference.”
Given this opportunity, the vast majority of volunteers
concluded the program with an expressed desire to help
other individuals with disabilities in the future. For a few
volunteers, this desire manifested in relatively informal
ways: “I am more likely to approach someone (with dis-
abilities) and ask if they need help. Also, I don’t stare like
I used to . . . ” For others, this desire formalized into an
academic and/or professional goal: “Believe Ballet has
encouraged me to study physical therapy in college. I want
to help people that cannot help themselves and maybe work
with children.” For still others, this desire translated into
abstract feelings of connection and, even, communion:
“When I see people with disabilities outside the program, I
wonder what I’d be able to do to help them. I feel a deeper
connection to them.” In fact, a number of volunteers
expressed that they felt a “deeper connection” to individu-
als with disabilities, and quite a few offered evidence of
how this connection had affected their behavior: “In my
everyday life, I try to make sure people refrain from using
the term ‘retarded’ because I now take it personally,” and “I
am offended if someone treats handicapped people differ-
ently or disrespectfully and make others aware of it.”
Yet, for a larger number of volunteers, this desire to
help came to be directed at a larger population; one encap-
sulating all people, regardless of ability/disability:
“Believe Ballet has made me see that people need help and
others or anyone can help in the smallest way.” Central to
this perspective was a newly developed appreciation for
the ways in which people are both interconnected and
interdependent:
Believe Ballet makes me feel like I am making an impact on
someone’s life, and they are making an impact on mine by
participating (as a dancer) in Believe Ballet. It helps me to see
how the ripple effect of an action can impact anyone. Also
central to this perspective was a developing sense that success
is a function of “work(ing) as a whole, not an individual.”
Discussion
Studies indicate that, despite the Americans With Disabilities
Act and other contemporary efforts to integrate individual
lives across (dis)abilities, many young Americans still
report limited levels of intimate contact with individuals
with disabilities (King, Rosenbaum, Armstrong, & Milner,
2008; Rosenbaum, Armstrong, & King, 1986, 1988). Given
that “personal contact is a major factor in attitudinal shifts
(about disabilities) across many cultures,” young peoples’
relationships across (dis)abilities stand to affect both the
individuals involved and the cultures/societies in which
they are embedded (McConkey, Dowling, Hassan, &
Menke, 2012, p. 11).
Volunteers’ experiences in Believe Ballet are illustrative
of these effects. As a result of their participation in the pro-
gram, most volunteers reported an increased awareness of
the existence and experiences of individuals with physical
Traver and Duran 1153
disabilities. Although significant in and of itself, this aware-
ness provided the foundation for meaningful changes in the
way volunteers perceived disability and ability, more gener-
ally. Interestingly, and consistent with disability studies
scholars’ efforts to “re-(engage) the body” in their research
on the social construction of disability, this perceptual
change reflected volunteers’ active contemplation of the
relationships between bodies and society (Snyder &
Mitchell, 2001, p. 367).
For example, because of their experiences in Believe
Ballet, many volunteers began to grapple with their own
and others’ definitions of (dis)abilities. Reflecting on the
capabilities of the dancers, they questioned who or what
makes one individual able-bodied and another individual
disabled. They also began to trouble the poles of “ability”
and “disability”; actively interrogating whether a contin-
uum was even the right register for our varied/variable abil-
ities and embodiment. Noteworthy, of course, is how the
linguistic categories and words volunteers used to disman-
tle these definitions (e.g., new poles like “similar” and “dif-
ferent”; the word “handicapped”) threatened to discursively
reconstruct them. Early reports from this research encour-
aged Believe Ballet’s executive director to take an active
role in teaching volunteers about preferred language usage
when talking about disability and individuals with disabili-
ties. Also significant are those volunteers who didn’t par-
take in this questioning; those whose conceptions of
disability and ability were mired in ideas of “misfortune”
and “luck.” Future analysis of these data will employ a criti-
cal analytic perspective to tease out the variables—demo-
graphic, relational, and so on—that might explain these
divergent impacts.
Also related to their participation in the program, many
volunteers conveyed a developing acceptance and apprecia-
tion for body diversity. In fact, eschewing language most
typically associated with constructions of the “super-crip”
(Quinlan & Bates, 2008), they came to see body diversity as
a source of power and creativity in the world. Invoking
words like “freedom” and distancing themselves from the
notion of a singular “perfect” body, they began to privilege
effort—over form—in their assessments of bodies (includ-
ing their own), and to perceive the body as a subject, rather
than an object, in the world.6 Countless studies document
American girls’/women’s efforts to measure up to objecti-
fying images of the ideal female body (e.g., Bordo, 1993;
Brumberg, 1997; Davis, 1995; Gimlin, 2002). Yet, few
studies, apart from the rare and notable theoretical excep-
tion (e.g., Galler, 2006; Garland-Thomson, 2004; Hahn,
1988), explore how girls’/women’s interactions across (dis)
abilities might impact their individual and collective sense,
acceptance, and use of their bodies. Building on insights
from the field of disability, gender, and sport (DePauw &
Gavron, 1995; Manderson & Peake, 2005), as well as dis-
ability and the arts (Sandahl & Auslander, 2005; Sherlock,
1996; Silvers, 2002), future research should examine
whether physical activity and artistic/creative self-expres-
sion are central to the effects described above.
Finally, in reflecting on their role in dancers’ success in
the program, most volunteers reported an emerging sense of
responsibility to and connection with others. Reveling in
this sense, as well as associated feelings of confidence and
competence, they reported a desire to continue helping oth-
ers, even after the program’s end. How these “Others” were
defined, however, varied: individuals with disabilities; peo-
ple, more generally; even other volunteers and/or them-
selves. Ironically, it might be those volunteers who
recognize this final group in need of help—other volunteers
and/or themselves—that deserve our attention; primarily
because they came to view “help” as an expression of inter-
connection/communion rather than service. Early feedback
provided to the executive director of Believe Ballet encour-
aged her to frame volunteers’ contributions to the program
in these terms, as well as to engage volunteers in regular
written reflections on the ways in which the program and
the dancers were “helping” them. Future research at the
intersection of volunteerism, (dis)abilities, and gender
should delve further into participants’ definitions and expe-
riences of care (see also Froschl, Rousso, & Rubin, 2001).
Conclusion
In After a Fall: A Sociomedical Sojourn, Richardson (2013)
reveals—through insights both personal and analytic—how
proximity to disability can impact one’s sense of embodi-
ment and understanding of ableism. In this article, we build
on these revelations by examining how nondisabled high
school–aged girls’ perceptions of disability and ability are
affected by their volunteer experiences in Believe Ballet. As
noted, the study indicates that volunteers’ participation in
Believe Ballet often led to their increased awareness of the
existence and experiences of individuals with physical dis-
abilities, grappling with constructions of physical ability
and disability, acceptance of and appreciation for body
diversity, and communion with others across (dis)abilities.
This study also points to directions for future research, spe-
cifically, the variables that mediate nondisabled individuals’
interactions with individuals with disabilities, how girls’/
women’s interactions across (dis)abilities affect their indi-
vidual and collective sense of embodiment, the ways in
which physical activity and artistic/creative self-expression
might be central to the aforementioned effects, and the man-
ner in which carework is understood and experienced at the
intersection of (dis)ability, volunteerism, and gender.
At the same time, this study also adds to the burgeoning
effort to shine a “spotlight” on ableism in more general
ways as well (Campbell, 2008, p. 1). For example, although
Staub (2005) argues that inclusion is most often studied
from the perspective of students with disabilities, this study
1154 Qualitative Inquiry 20(10)
explores how inclusion—in the equally under-resourced
and understudied context of after-school-programs for chil-
dren and young people with disabilities (Rousso, 2001)—
impacts nondisabled youth. In a similar fashion, although
Garland-Thomson (2004, p. 94) praises those moments in
contemporary Western culture(s) when people with disabil-
ities are “resymbolized”—moments like the Believe Ballet
recital, which centers and celebrates the difference and
dance of girls with physical disabilities—this study attempts
to understand nondisabled individuals’ reactions to this
“resymbolization.” In so doing, it shifts our focus to what
Albright (1998) calls the “ableist gaze” (p. 494) encourag-
ing us to examine whether and how these moments actually
resymbolize (dis)abilities and/or the body in/for the culture
at large. Finally, by focusing not on Believe Ballet’s dancers
with disabilities but on the program’s nondisabled volun-
teers, we begin to interrogate and trouble what Richardson
(2013) describes as the privileges of normalcy.
Acknowledgments
The authors wish to thank Nivah Kaplan-Nadel and Jesse
Berberich, two former Queensborough Community College stu-
dents who were instrumental in organizing the data and literature
for this research. In addition, the authors would like to recognize
the generosity of the executive director of Believe Ballet, as well
as the many volunteers who consented to participate in this
research. They would also like to thank Dr. Ronald Berger for his
encouragement and editorial assistance with this article.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with
respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this
article.
Funding
The authors wish to acknowledge the following organizations for
their support of this research: the American Sociological
Association’s Fund for the Advancement of the Discipline and the
PSC-CUNY Awards program.
Notes
1. Believe Ballet is a pseudonym.
2. Erb’s palsy entails paralysis of the arm due to injury to the
upper nerves of the arm. Cerebral palsy is a condition caused
by trauma to the brain before, during, or shortly after birth
and can impair a person’s motor function in the lower and/or
upper body.
3. About two thirds of the volunteers self-identified as White or
Caucasian, with the rest of various minority or unidentified
statuses. Their ages ranged from 13- to 18-years-old, with an
average age of 16.
4. The questionnaires were developed in consultation with
a girls’ studies/sociometrics scholar at the University of
California–Berkeley, a professor of education at Fordham
University, the executive director of Believe Ballet, and two
experienced Believe Ballet volunteers. The items used in the
questionnaires are available from the first author on request.
5. The authors collaborated on the coding. Although content
analysts often tout the interrater reliability of such partner-
ships, this experience was remarkable for more more than
just the generativity and reliability of content elements.
Rather it was also rewarding for the process of developing
a nonhierarchical collaboration between faculty and student
that is consistent with the tenets of feminist pedagogy as
well as the intellectual orientation of feminist disability stud-
ies (see Richardson, Fonow, & Cook, 1985).
6. These findings do not mean to suggest that girls and women
with disabilities are immune from the pressures to conform
to this notion of a singular “perfect” body. In fact, Rousso’s
(1996) research on young women with disabilities revealed
that their feelings of body dissatisfaction had as much to do
with breast size and weight as they did with disability.
References
Albright, A. (1998). Strategic abilities: Negotiating the disabled
body in dance. Michigan Quarterly Review, 37, 475-501.
Asch, A. (2004). Critical race theory, feminism, and disability:
Reflections on social justice and personal identity. In B. G.
Smith & B. Hutchison (Eds.), Gendering disability (pp. 9-44).
New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
Barton, L. (1998). Sociology, disability studies and education:
Some observations. In T. Shakespeare (Ed.), The disabil-
ity studies reader: Social science perspectives (pp. 53-64).
London, England: Cassell.
Berg, B. L. (2001). Qualitative research methods for the social
sciences. New York, NY: Allyn & Bacon.
Bordo, S. (1993). Unbearable weight: Feminism, western culture,
and the body. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Brumberg, J. J. (1997). The body project: An intimate history of
American girls. New York, NY: Random House.
Campbell, F. K. (1999). “Refleshingly disabled”: Interrogations
into the corporeality of “disabled” bodies. The Australian
Feminist Law Journal, 12, 57-80.
Campbell, F. K. (2001). Inciting legal fictions: “Disability’s” date
with ontology and the ableist body of the law. Griffith Law
Review, 10, 42-62.
Campbell, F. K. (2008). Exploring internal ableism using critical
race theory. Disability & Society, 23, 151-162.
Campbell, F. K. (2009). Contours of ableism: The production
of disability and abledness. London, England: Palgrave
Macmillan.
Chouinard, V. (1997). Making space for disabling differences:
Challenging ableist geographies. Environment and Planning
D: Society and Space, 15, 379-390.
Connell, R. (2009). Short introductions: Gender (2nd ed.).
Malden, MA: Polity Press.
Davis, K. (1995). Reshaping the female body: The dilemma of cos-
metic surgery. New York, NY: Routledge.
DePauw, K. P., & Gavron, S. P. (1995). Disability and sport.
Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
Donaldson, J. (1980). Changing attitudes toward handicapped
persons: A review and analysis of research. Exceptional
Children, 46, 504-514.
Traver and Duran 1155
Fine, M., & Asch, A. (1988). Disability beyond stigma: Social
interaction, discrimination, and activism. Journal of Social
Issues, 44(1), 3-21.
Froschl, M., Rousso, H., & Rubin, E. (2001). Nothing to do
after school: More of an issue for girls. In H. Rousso & M.
C. Wehmeyer (Eds.), Double Jeopardy: Addressing gender
equity in special education (pp. 313-336). Albany: State
University of New York Press.
Galler, R. (2006). The myth of the perfect body. In V. Taylor, N.
Whittier, & L. J. Rupp (Eds.), Feminist frontiers (7th ed., pp.
165-172). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Garland-Thomson, R. (1997). Extraordinary bodies: Figuring
physical disability in American culture and literature. New
York, NY: Columbia University Press.
Garland-Thomson, R. (2001). Re-shaping, re-thinking, re-defin-
ing: Feminist disability studies. Washington, DC: Center for
Women Policy Studies.
Garland-Thomson, R. (2004). Integrating disability, transform-
ing feminist theory. In B. G. Smith & B. Hutchison (Eds.),
Gendering disability (pp. 73-103). New Brunswick, NJ:
Rutgers University Press.
Gerschick, T. J. (2000). Toward a theory of disability and gen-
der. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 25,
1263-1268.
Gimlin, D. (2002). Body work: Beauty and self-image in American
culture. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Goble, C. (2004). Dependence, independence and normality.
In J. Swain, V. Finkelstein, S. French, & M. Oliver (Eds.),
Disabling barriers—Enabling environments (2nd ed., pp. 41-
46). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Hahn, H. (1988). Can disability de beautiful? Social Policy, 18(3),
26-32.
Hall, K. Q. (2002). Feminism, disability, and embodiment. NWSA
Journal, 14(3), vii-xiii.
Hillyer, B. (1993). Feminism and disability. Norman: University
of Oklahoma Press.
Hughes, B. (2004). Disability and the body. In J. Swain, V.
Finkelstein, S. French, & M. Oliver (Eds.), Disabling barri-
ers—Enabling environments (2nd ed., pp. 63-68). Thousand
Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Inahara, M. (2009). The body which is not one: The body, femi-
ninity and disability. Body & Society, 15(1), 47-62.
Kimmel, M. (2004). The gendered society (2nd ed.). New York,
NY: Oxford University Press.
King, S. M., Rosenbaum, P. L., Armstrong, R. W., & Milner,
R. (2008). An epidemiological study of children’s attitudes
toward disability. Developmental medicine & child neurol-
ogy, 31, 237-245.
Manderson, L., & Peake, S. (2005). Men in motion: Disability and
the performance of masculinity. In C. Sandahl & P. Auslander
(Eds.), Bodies in commotion: Disability & performance (pp.
230-241). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
McConkey, R., Dowling, S., Hassan, D., & Menke, S. (2012).
Promoting social inclusion through unified sports for youth
with intellectual disabilities: A five-nation study. Journal of
Intellectual Disability Research, 57, 923-935.
McReuer, R. (2002). Compulsory able-bodiedness and queer/dis-
abled existence. In R. Garland-Thomson, B. J. Brueggemann,
& S. L. Snyder (Eds.), Disability studies: Enabling the
humanities (pp. 88-99). New York, NY: The Modern
Language Association of America.
Price, J., & Shildrick, M. (2002). Bodies together: Touch, eth-
ics, and disability. In T. M. Corker & T. Shakespeare (Eds.),
Disability/postmodernity: Embodying disability theory (pp.
62-75). New York, NY: Continuum.
Punch, K. F. (2005). Introduction to qualitative research:
Quantitative and qualitative approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand
Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Quinlan, M. M., & Bates, B. R. (2008). Dancers and discourses
of (dis)ability: Heather Mill’s embodiment of disability on
Dancing with the Stars. Text and Performance Quarterly,
1(2), 64-80.
Richardson, L. (2007). Writing: A method of inquiry. In N. K.
Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative
research (2nd ed., pp. 923-948). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Richardson, L. (2013). After a fall: A sociomedical sojourn.
Walnut Creek, CA: Left Coast Press.
Richardson, L., Fonow, M. M., & Cook, J. A. (1985). From gender
seminar to gender community. Teaching Sociology, 12, 313-324.
Rosenbaum, P. L., Armstrong, R. W., & King, S. M. (1986).
Children’s attitudes toward disabled peers: A self-report mea-
sure. Journal of Pediatric Psychology, 11, 517-530.
Rosenbaum, P. L., Armstrong, R. W., & King, S. M. (1988).
Determinants of children’s attitudes toward disability: A
review of evidence. Children’s Health Care, 17, 32-39.
Rousso, H. (1996). Sexuality and a positive sense of self. In D.
Krotoski, M. Nosek, & M. Turk (Eds.), Women with physical
disabilities: Achieving and maintaining health and well-being
(pp. 109-115). Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.
Rousso, H. (2001). Strong proud sisters: Girls and young women with
disabilities. Washington, DC: Center for Women Policy Studies.
Sandahl, C., & Auslander, P. (2005). Introduction: Disability stud-
ies in commotion with performance studies. In C. Sandahl & P.
Auslander (Eds.), Bodies in commotion: Disability and perfor-
mance (pp. 1-12). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Sherlock, J. (1996). Dance and the culture of the body: Where
is the grotesque? Women’s Studies International Forum, 19,
525-533.
Silvers, A. (2002). The crooked timber of humanity: Disability,
ideology and the aesthetic. In M. Corker & T. Shakespeare
(Eds.), Disability/postmodernity: Embodying disability the-
ory (pp. 228-244). London, England: Continuum.
Snow, D. A., Morrill, C., & Anderson, L. (2003). Elaborating
analytic ethnography: Linking fieldwork and theory.
Ethnography, 4, 181-200.
Snyder, S. L., & Mitchell, D. T. (2001). Re-engaging the body:
Disability studies and the resistance to embodiment. Public
Culture, 13, 367-389.
Staub, D. (2005). Inclusion and other kids: Here’s what research
shows so far about inclusion’s effect on nondisabled students.
Tempe, AZ: National Institute for Urban School Reform.
Thorne, B. (1999). Gender play: Girls and boys in school. New
Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
Wendell, S. (2006). Toward a feminist theory of disability. In L.
J. Davis (Ed.), The disability studies reader (2nd ed., pp. 243-
256). New York, NY: Routledge.
Wolbring, G. (2008). The politics of ableism. Development, 51,
252-258.
1156 Qualitative Inquiry 20(10)
Author Biographies
Amy E. Traver is an assistant professor of sociology at
Queensborough Community College of the City University of
New York (CUNY). She is a graduate of Colgate University
(BA, 1997), Harvard University (EdM, 1999), and SUNY Stony
Brook (PhD, 2008). She is interested in intersections of race/
ethnicity, gender, and (dis)ability in contemporary American
families and educational institutions. She has published articles
on these topics in Qualitative Sociology, Sociological Focus,
International Journal of Sociology of the Family, The Journal of
Education Policy, and The Irish Journal of Sociology. She is
also engaged in research on community college pedagogies.
John Duran is an honors undergraduate student at Queensborough
Community College and Queens College, both of the CUNY. He
received his AA in liberal arts from Queensborough Community
College in May 2014. At Queens College, he majors in sociology.
He aspires to become an occupational therapist and continually
engage the two areas of study he holds dear: sociology and dis-
ability studies.