Ровно, Донецкая область, Australia, 78 Shannon Court
Puar's intervention is uncomfortable for disability studies insofar as she challenges the methods wherein the sector of inquiry reproduces disability as an oppressed identification and an aggrieved topic enacted via "wounded attachments" (Puar 2012, 157). Puar's venture of rethinking disability is to maneuver from disability to debility, not so as to "disavow the essential political gains enabled by disability activists globally, however to invite a deconstruction of what capacity and capability imply, affective and in any other case, and to push for a broader politics of debility that destabilizes the seamless manufacturing of abled-bodies in relation to incapacity" (166). In doing so, Puar asks: "How would our political landscape remodel if it actively decentered the sustained reproduction and proliferation of the grieving subject, opening instead towards an affective politics, attentive to ecologies of sensation and switchpoints of bodily capacities, to habituations and unhabituations, to tendencies, multiple temporalities, and becomings?" (157). Puar thus requires a non-anthropocentric affective politics that moves us away from distinctive aggrieved human topics whose harm can be transformed into cultural capital. In something akin to creating constellations, Puar strikes us away from considering via binaries of abled/disabled and reframes this relationship in terms of debility and capacity to attend to adjustments within capitalism. If you liked this write-up and you would like to get more facts pertaining to corbettmelchiorsen53.wordpress.com kindly visit our own webpage.