这是用户在 2024-5-6 24:59 为 https://app.immersivetranslate.com/pdf-pro/93c24587-9529-4dfc-9a20-2c9e65f26d9c 保存的双语快照页面，由 沉浸式翻译 提供双语支持。了解如何保存？
2024_05_06_fc3e16b319639063595ag
This timely new edition by Davis and Sanchez captures a number of established and, crucially, emerging perspectives in US disability studies. The text constitutes a new key reading for students and researchers alike.
Davis 和 Sanchez 的这个及时的新版本涵盖了美国残疾研究中许多已建立和至关重要的新视角。这篇文章对学生和研究人员来说都是一篇新的重要阅读。
Dan Goodley, Professor of Disability Studies and Education University of Sheffield
达恩·古德利，谢菲尔德大学残疾研究与教育教授
"Like all other editions before it, this one has thoughtful and provocative changes that also then illustrate the unfolding and expanding nature of critical work in our understandings and explorations-both current and historical-of disability and complex embodiment."
与之前的所有版本一样，这个版本也有深思熟虑且引人深省的变化，这些变化也展示了我们对残疾和复杂体现的理解和探索-无论是当前的还是历史的-不断发展和扩展的本质。
Brenda Jo Brueggemanm, Aetna Endowed Chair of Writing University of Comnecticut, Co-editor, Disability Studies Quarterly
布伦达·乔·布鲁格曼，康涅狄格大学埃特纳基金会写作讲座教授，残疾研究季刊联合主编
"More BIPOC and activist authors, more interdisciplinary and global in scope-this is the edition you want to have on your shelf. A new opening section surveys key ideas in the field, making the Reader more teachable than ever and underscoring that disability studies has arrived."
更多的 BIPOC 和活动家作者，更多的跨学科和全球范围-这是您想要放在书架上的版本。新的开篇部分调查了该领域的关键思想，使读者比以往更易教授，并强调残疾研究已经到来。
Mara Mills, Associate Professor of Media, Culture, and Communication and Co-director, NYU Center for Disability Studies
玛拉·米尔斯（Mara Mills），纽约大学媒体、文化和传播副教授，残疾研究中心联合主任
"The breadth and depth in this brand-new edition of The Disability Studies Reader offers foundational grounding for approaching the study of disability while at every turn insisting on disability's imbrication with race, gender, sexuality, geopolitical movements, and socioeconomic class."
《残疾研究读者》这一全新版本的广度和深度为接近残疾研究提供了基础，同时坚持认为残疾与种族、性别、性取向、地缘政治运动和社会经济阶级的交织不可分割。
Stephanie L. Kerschbaum, Associate Professor, Department of English, University of Delaware
斯蒂芬妮·L·克什鲍姆，特拉华大学英语系副教授
"Davis's work as both scholar and editor has long been seminal to disability studies. An everevolving field, new readings on neurodivergence in this edition is a welcome addition, as well as continuing examinations of race, mental health, and global perspectives."
戴维斯作为学者和编辑的工作长期以来对残疾研究具有重要意义。作为一个不断发展的领域，在本版中对神经多样性的新阅读是一个受欢迎的补充，同时继续审视种族、心理健康和全球视角。
Johnson Cheu, Assistant Professor, Michigan State University
约翰逊·车，密歇根州立大学助理教授
The Disability Studies Reader
《残疾研究读本》
Sixth Edition 第六版
Edited by 编辑
Lennard J. Davis
Consulting Editor 咨询编辑
Rebecca Sanchez
HV
Managing Editor 主编
1568
.05696
2021

17 Critical Access Studies
17 项关键准入研究

Aimi Hamraie

Summary 摘要

Part of the ongoing work for disability justice in a post-ADA world, Aimi Hamraie argues, must be a reconsideration of design in our built environment. In this chapter, they provide a history of Universal Design, noting how, despite its roots in disability-specific design, its meanings have proliferated in a post-ADA world in ways that tend to be dissociated from disability. This disability-neutral approach to "good" design assumes a universal, normative user and neglects concrete "access-knowledge" grounded in users' needs and interactions in space.
在后 ADA 世界中为残疾人正义进行持续工作的一部分，Aimi Hamraie 认为，必须重新考虑我们建筑环境中的设计。在本章中，他们提供了通用设计的历史，指出尽管其根源于残疾人特定设计，但在后 ADA 世界中，其含义已经扩散，往往与残疾脱钩。这种对“好”设计的残疾中立方法假定了一个普遍的、规范的用户，并忽视了基于用户在空间中的需求和互动的具体“获取知识”。
Both Universal Design and barrier-free design, the latter of which is often taken to be more specifically focused on legal codes pertaining to disability access, are fundamentally part of the same project of producing better, more accessible design by attending to the diverse bodymind experiences of users. Moreover, despite increased attention to the field of critical access studies, Hamraie contends that our current understanding of access is largely driven by historical assumptions about the user as a "white, middle-class, productive citizen."
通用设计和无障碍设计，后者通常更专注于与残疾人士准入相关的法规，实质上是同一项目的基本部分，通过关注用户多样化的身心体验来产生更好、更易接近的设计。此外，尽管对关键准入研究领域的关注增加，Hamraie 认为，我们当前对准入的理解在很大程度上受到关于用户的历史假设的驱动，即用户是“白人、中产阶级、富有生产力的公民”。

Ada Now! Ada Now! Ada Now!
Ada 现在！Ada 现在！Ada 现在！

One hundred stairs divide a gathering crowd from the US Capitol building above. Numbering in the hundreds, they chant and hold signs. A group breaks off, leaving behind wheelchairs and crutches to lay flesh on stairs and crawl to the top. Framed against the building's steps, the bodies are clearly misfits: unanticipated, noncompliant, and taking up space.' Walking to their offices, irritated lawmakers step over and around misfit bodies, onlookers snap photographs, news anchors interview activists as they crawl to the top. Framed by the stairs in a striking image, these public bodies communicate what signs and chants alone cannot: this building, a symbol of governance and democratic citizenship for all—an embodiment of the nation itself - was not designed with disabled people in mind.
一百级台阶将聚集的人群与上方的美国国会大厦隔开。人数众多，他们高呼口号，举着标语牌。一群人分开，留下轮椅和拐杖，将自己的肉体躺在台阶上，爬向顶端。站在建筑物台阶前，这些身体显然是不合群的：意料之外，不服从，占据空间。愤怒的立法者走向他们的办公室，跨过和绕过这些不合群的身体，旁观者拍照，新闻主播采访活动人士，他们爬向顶端。在一个引人注目的画面中，这些公众身体传达了标语和口号本身无法传达的信息：这座建筑物，作为所有人的治理和民主公民身份的象征，乃是国家本身的体现，却并未考虑到残疾人。
The event was the "Capitol Crawl," a disability rights protest demanding that Congress pass the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990, landmark antidiscrimination legislation that identified a civil right to accessible buildings, public transportation, and workplaces for disabled citizens. Widely credited as the final push that resolved congressional deadlock, the Capitol Crawl demonstrated the power of disabled people as resourceful agents whose novel tactics showed visible evidence of disability discrimination, rather than patients in need of medical cure. But the critical work of these visible tactics went far beyond the ADA itself. The demonstration professed a particular disability theory of architecture: that built forms convey material rhetorics, which reveal cultural assignments of knowledge and power. In the Capitol Crawl, disabled people spoke back against the steps by deploying embodied speech and lived knowledge as architectural critique.
该事件是“国会爬行”行动，是一场残疾权利抗议活动，要求国会通过 1990 年的《美国残疾人法案》（ADA），这是一项具有里程碑意义的反歧视立法，确认残疾公民有权进入无障碍建筑物、公共交通和工作场所。广泛认为，国会爬行是解决国会僵局的最后推动力，展示了残疾人作为足智多谋的行动者的力量，他们的新颖策略展示了残疾歧视的明显证据，而不是需要医疗治疗的病人。但这些明显策略的关键工作远不止于 ADA 本身。这次示威表达了一种特殊的建筑残疾理论：建筑形式传达了物质修辞，揭示了知识和权力的文化分配。在国会爬行中，残疾人通过运用具身体性的言说和生活知识作为建筑批评，回应了这些台阶。
At the 25th-anniversary celebration of the ADA in 2015, a temporary mural appeared Ase steps of the Carnegie Library in Washington, DC, bearing President George H.W. on the steps of remarks: "With today's signing of the landmark Americans [with| DisabiliBush's historic remar, woman, and child with a disability can now pass through once-closed ties Act, every man, woman, an of equality; independence, and freedom."' Google's charity doors into a bright new era of equality; independence, and the mural and others like it on staircases organization Impact Challenge commissioned disability rights leader who (in the organization's near the National. "What if we could create a more inclusive world for everyone?"" For words) celebrating the anniversary, the murals (and their corporate donor) signaled the those celebre of disabled Americans in US culture and life. Bush's words confirmed the secure place of disabled Americe disability rights had finally arrived. But working in post-ADA narrative that the time wist en along with concert with post-racial narratives, which insist that state-sanaly to elide the existence of material inequalities. By painting Bush's promise of ity equality coess on the built form of a staircase - the same structure that was the Capitol universal access on - he murals hid in plain sight (and without a hint of irony) the persisCrawl's focal point-the murals hid in plam sight (and without ated people continue to face tent architectural, attitudint
在 2015 年 ADA 成立 25 周年庆典上，华盛顿哥伦比亚特区卡内基图书馆的台阶上出现了一幅临时壁画，上面刻有乔治·H·W·布什总统的讲话：“随着今天标志性的《美国残疾人法案》的签署，每一个残疾人、妇女和儿童现在都可以穿过曾经关闭的门户，迈向平等、独立和自由的新时代。”谷歌的慈善组织 Impact Challenge 委托了残疾权利领袖在国家附近的楼梯上创作类似的壁画，以庆祝这一周年纪念。“如果我们能为每个人创造一个更具包容性的世界会怎样呢？”这些壁画（及其公司捐赠者）为残疾美国人在美国文化和生活中的庆祝标志着残疾人在美国文化和生活中的庆祝。布什的话证实了残疾美国人在美国文化和生活中的安全地位。但在 ADA 后叙事中工作，这与后种族叙事一起，坚持国家消除物质不平等的存在。通过在楼梯的建筑形式上绘制布什对平等的承诺，他的壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有丝毫讽刺意味），突出了持续面对的人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人们继续面对的焦点-壁画隐藏在明处（并且没有任何暗示）人
in the post-A illegible. Disability law scholars and policy makers have documented the ADA's failures to illegible. Disability law schent housing, and public spaces, attributing these limitations improve access to employment, housing, strustemic, and attitudinal to the law's limited provisions and inability to ade le peridence discriminations that disabled people face. Disabled people continue to leave evidence that the ADA has not resulted in a postdiscrimination world, emphasizing that normal, that the ADNanted aspects of built environments, such as the prevalence of stairs, work in taken-for-granted aspects or buitedes. Disabled painter Sunaura Taylor's Thinking Stairs tandem with discrimmatory attitudes of comic book-style frames, showing a grayscale illustrates this argument through a series of comic book-style frames, showing "Whays I go
在后 A 难以辨认。残疾法学者和政策制定者已经记录了 ADA 在改善就业、住房和公共空间方面的失败，将这些限制归因于法律的有限规定和无法解决残疾人面临的歧视。残疾人继续留下证据表明 ADA 并没有导致一个不存在歧视的世界，强调了建筑环境中常见的障碍物，如楼梯的普遍存在，这些被视为理所当然的事物。残疾画家 Sunaura Taylor 的《思考楼梯》与漫画风格的歧视态度相辅相成，通过一系列漫画风格的画框展示了这一论点，展示了“我走的方式”。
sidewalk flanked with cartoonish red stairs emitting empty speech bubbles. "When out," Taylor writes, "it's as if the stairs are all bright red. It's as if they are all talking about me. But I don't know what they are saying. . . . They are manifestations of something me. But Ion't know we sindse the more sinister: discrimination. Ihe lancscape applack-and-white figure driving her power final frame, in which Taylor herself appears as a black-and-wunicate what the people-and chair amid staring pedestrians. Wordlessly, the stairs communicate what the people-and their stares-
人行道两侧是卡通风格的红色楼梯，散发着空白的对话气泡。“当我外出时，”泰勒写道，“就好像楼梯都是鲜艳的红色。就好像它们都在谈论我。但我不知道它们在说什么……它们是某种我自己的体现。但我不知道我们感受到的更加阴险的东西：歧视。画面中是黑白人物驾驶着她的权力，最后一个画面中，泰勒本人出现在一个黑色和白色的椅子中间，周围是凝视的行人。楼梯无声地传达了人们和他们凝视的内容。
The post-ADA narrative thus misses a crucial point offered by disabled users, designers, The post-ADA narrative thus misses a crucial point ocial attitudes, discriminatory systems, and activists: that the bult world is inseparable miom keep in mind. Put another way, how we structure knowledge, interact with material things, and tell stories about the users of built environments matter for belonging and justice. When these stories embrace as common sense such values as freedom, access, and "a more inclusive world for everyone," it becomes all the such valtes as freedom, ccess, apritical lessons of the Capitol Crawl protestors, whose embodied more important to heed the critical everyone and how can we know?
因此，ADA 后的叙事错过了残疾用户、设计师、社会态度、歧视性体系和活动人士提出的一个关键观点：即建筑世界与社会认同和正义密不可分。换句话说，我们如何构建知识、与物质事物互动以及讲述关于建筑环境使用者的故事对归属感和正义至关重要。当这些故事将自由、获取和“更具包容性的世界”等价值视为常识时，就变得更加重要，以倾听国会爬行抗议者的关键政治教训，他们的具体行动如何影响每个人以及我们如何知道？
The shifting figure of the user, particularly the disabled user, has shaped justifications for and material practices of Universal Design in the present. My focus is not to evaluate specific designed products or to endorse certain principles of design. Rather, I am concerned with designed products or to endorse cert the figure of the user, justify design for particular users, the implications of how we imagine the figure of the user, justify design for the value of such design for broader questions of difference and belonging in the contemporary United States.
用户的变化形象，特别是残疾用户，已经塑造了对当前普遍设计的理由和实践。我的重点不是评估特定设计产品或支持某些设计原则。相反，我关注的是设计产品或支持某些设计原则，为特定用户辩护，我们如何想象用户形象的影响，为当代美国的差异和归属感的更广泛问题辩护。
In the early twenty-first century, the term "Universal Design" gained popularity as an easy reference to the idea that inclusive design benefits everyone, regardless of disability or age. Its global circulation and reach into a number of disciplines beyond architecture, however, make it easy to forget that Universal Design is a very recent discourse, and that how this phenom enon is named, defined, and justified is a product of the post-ADA era. The post-ADA narrative dictates that accessible design, like freedom, is a self-evident, commonsense good. But how the built world materializes is inseparable from the value-laden politics of knowing. "All too often," wrote disabled architect and accessibility expert Ronald Mace, "designers don' take the needs of disabled and elderly people into account when they are designing a building."" Focused on accessible design as a site of meaning-making and world-building, I argue that since the twentieth century, the project of designing a more inclusive world for everyone has taken shape through specific arrangements of knowing and making: the phenomenon that I am calling access-knowledge.
在 21 世纪初，"通用设计"一词因为易于引用包容性设计使每个人受益的理念而变得流行。然而，它在全球范围内的传播和影响力超越了建筑学等多个学科，这使人很容易忘记通用设计是一个非常新的话语，以及这种现象如何被命名、定义和证明是后美国残疾人法案时代的产物。后 ADA 时代的叙事规定，无障碍设计，就像自由一样，是不言自明的、常识性的好事。但建成环境的实现与充满价值取向的知识政治是不可分割的。残疾建筑师和无障碍专家罗纳德·梅斯写道："设计者在设计建筑时往往不考虑残疾和年长人的需求。"我认为，重点放在无障碍设计作为意义生成和世界构建的场所，自 20 世纪以来，为每个人设计一个更具包容性的世界的项目已经通过特定的知识和制造安排形成：我所称之为获取知识。
Access-knowledge, a regime of legibility and illegibility, emerged from interdisciplinary concerns with what users need, how their bodies function, how they interact with space, and what kinds of people are likely to be in the world." While twentieth-century US rehabilitation experts, ergonomists, social scientists, architects, product designers, and policy makers claimed expertise about accessibility as an objective, functional practice, disabled users positioned themselves as experts credentialed by their lived experiences to remake the world. How designers negotiated the politics of knowing-making, in turn, implicated their strategies and interventions. Behind the scenes of legible public events, such as the Capitol Crawl or the passage of legislation, Universal Design proponents conducted more subtle forms of activism, using research, technical guidance, and design education as spheres in which to challenge designers' dominant conceptions of users.
访问知识，一种可读性和不可读性的制度，源自跨学科关注用户需求、他们的身体功能、他们如何与空间互动以及世界上可能存在哪种人的问题。"20 世纪美国康复专家、人体工程学家、社会科学家、建筑师、产品设计师和政策制定者声称对无障碍性具有客观、功能性实践的专业知识，残疾用户则将自己定位为凭借生活经验获得资格的专家，以重塑世界。设计师如何协商知识制造的政治，反过来，涉及到他们的策略和干预。在可读的公共事件背后，比如国会爬行事件或立法通过，通用设计倡导者进行了更微妙的形式的活动，利用研究、技术指导和设计教育作为挑战设计师主导用户概念的领域。

Locating Access-Knowledge
定位访问知识

"Like a bean sprout that emerges only after its root is deep and strong," wrote Molly Story, James Mueller, and Ronald Mace, "universal design has its beginnings in demographic, legislative, economic, and social changes among older adults and people with disabilities throughout the twentieth century." In 1985 Mace coined the term "Universal Design" to describe the idea that many people, whether disabled or nondisabled, benefit from a more accessible built environment." "Mace concluded that architects and product designers should make all environments accessible, rather than requiring disabled people to request "retrofits" (or alterations) after a building has already been constructed. Although these ideas had circulated for decades, Mace's term propelled the concept into the ADA era.
“就像茁壮成长的豆芽必须在根深叶茂之后才能冒出地面一样，”莫莉·斯托里、詹姆斯·穆勒和罗纳德·梅斯写道，“通用设计的起源可以追溯到整个二十世纪老年人和残障人士在人口统计、立法、经济和社会变革中的变化。” 1985 年，梅斯创造了“通用设计”这个术语，用以描述一个更具无障碍的建筑环境对许多人（无论残障或非残障）都有益的理念。梅斯得出结论，建筑师和产品设计师应该使所有环境都具有无障碍性，而不是要求残障人士在建筑物已经建成后请求“改造”（或改动）。尽管这些想法已经流传了几十年，但梅斯的术语将这一概念推向了 ADA 时代。"
While Mace's term preceded the ADA by five years, the dominant narrative about Universal Design is a post-ADA phenomenon. Since the late 1990s, Universal Design proponents have debated the concept's relationship to the ADA and, by extension, to the notion of disability itself. These debates are at an impasse, however, because the term is used to describe a wide range of approaches, from design that begins from a focus on disability (and has added value to others) to design that begins by focusing on a range of users to design that is just intuitive, common sense, and usable. We might resolve this impasse by historicizing the debates themselves in relation to shifting understandings of disability rights, good design, and human variation. By treating Universal Design as a shifting historical.discourse, a tool for making distinctions to create meaning and shape material realities, rather than a stable idea or practice, we can disentangle the aspiration for a more accessible world from the ideologies and values used to promote it.
尽管梅斯的任期比《美国残疾人法案》早了五年，但关于通用设计的主导叙事是一个后《美国残疾人法案》的现象。自 20 世纪 90 年代末以来，通用设计的倡导者一直在就该概念与《美国残疾人法案》以及残疾本身的概念之间的关系进行辩论。然而，这些辩论目前陷入僵局，因为该术语被用来描述一系列不同的方法，从从残疾出发（并为其他人增加价值）的设计，到从关注各种用户出发的设计，再到仅仅是直觉、常识和可用性的设计。我们可以通过将这些辩论置于残疾权利、良好设计和人类变异理解的转变背景下进行历史化，来解决这一僵局。通过将通用设计视为一个不断变化的历史话语，作为一个用于区分、创造意义和塑造物质现实的工具，而不是一个稳定的观念或实践，我们可以将对一个更具可访问性世界的愿景与用于推广它的意识形态和价值观分开。
Although the ADA popularized the discourse of Universal Design, the meanings of this term soon proliferated. Builders' magazines, newspapers, textbooks, and conference workshops began to tell a new story about Universal Design: that this approach was not about shops besibility for disabled users at all but rather about a commonsense approach to "good design" for everyone. Even prominent disabled people, such as journalist John Hockenberry, wheelchair user, adopted the post-ADA narrative. Describing accessibility renovations to his home kitchen, Hockenberry wrote
尽管 ADA 推广了“通用设计”的话语，但这个术语的含义很快就变得丰富多样。建筑杂志、报纸、教科书和会议研讨会开始讲述一个关于通用设计的新故事：这种方法并不是完全关注残疾用户的商店可访问性，而是关于一种面向所有人的“良好设计”的常识方法。即使是著名的残疾人，如记者约翰·霍肯贝瑞，一个使用轮椅的人，也采纳了 ADA 后的叙事。描述对他家厨房进行无障碍改造时，霍肯贝瑞写道
In the end there was nothing "special" or "handicapped" about it. This kitchen was merely made to work with the real people who lived there. Its universality came not from abstract specifications but from the lives of real people, creating spaces for their daily lives. No detailing or style or luxury could possibly be more precious than this simple quality Universal design is perhaps just an overly clinical name for something we think we know but perhaps we don't-good design.
最终，这里没有任何“特殊”或“残疾”之处。这个厨房只是为真正居住在那里的人而设计。它的普适性不是来自抽象的规格，而是来自真实人们的生活，为他们的日常生活创造空间。没有任何细节、风格或奢华可能比这种简单的通用设计更珍贵。通用设计也许只是对我们认为已经了解但也许并不了解的东西的一个过于临床的名称-良好设计。
This new story, a crucial part of the post-ADA narrative, implied that accessible design was easy to achieve and simple to practice. It was good business as the population aged. It had little to do with disability. It was commonsense, good design.
这个新故事是 ADA 后叙事的一个关键部分，暗示着无障碍设计容易实现且简单实践。随着人口老龄化，这是一个好的商业机会。这与残疾无关，是常识和良好设计。
Despite Universal Design's origins in the work of disability activists and in disability rights forts preceding the ADA, the term has become a popular discourse in the post-ADA world-not by centering disability as a category of marginalization but by disavowing it. But how did Mace's concept come to signify a disability-neutral approach? In 1997 the Center for Universal Design at North Carolina State University in Raleigh, North Carolina, released "The Principles of Universal Design," a guide for inclusive and flexible design. Since 1997 the "Principles" have become the most-often-cited reference to Universal Design, shaping, public perceptions of its theory. Although the "Principles" used terms such as "equitable and "flexible," references to specific users, such as disabled people, do not appear in the text. Consequently, the public perception of Universal Design since the late 1990 s has been shaped by what I term "barrier work," or claims that Universal Design is not about disability at all but rather about good design for everyone.
尽管通用设计起源于残疾人活动家的工作和在 ADA 之前的残疾人权利堡垒中，但这个术语已经成为 ADA 时代后的流行话语，不是通过将残疾作为边缘化的类别来中心化，而是通过否认它。但是，Mace 的概念是如何成为意味着残疾中立方法的呢？1997 年，北卡罗来纳州立大学罗利分校的通用设计中心发布了《通用设计原则》，这是一本关于包容和灵活设计的指南。自 1997 年以来，“原则”已成为最常被引用的通用设计参考，塑造了公众对其理论的看法。尽管“原则”使用了诸如“公平”和“灵活”之类的术语，但对特定用户的引用，如残疾人，并未出现在文本中。因此，自 20 世纪 90 年代末以来，对通用设计的公众看法已被我称之为“障碍工作”的东西所塑造，即通用设计并不是关于残疾，而是关于为每个人设计良好的设计。
Widely cited as a representation of Universal Design writ large, the "Principles of Universal Design" has spread beyond architecture and industrial design into Web design, education, and even critical humanistic scholarship. As it spreads, however, Universal Design claims are largely taken as common sense. The concept remains largely ahistorical and undertheorized as a result. With few exceptions, critical methodologies from the humanities and social sciences have not been applied to exploring Universal Design's interventions, possibilities, and strategies.
被广泛引用为大规模普适设计的代表，《普适设计原则》已经超越了建筑和工业设计，进入到网络设计、教育，甚至批判性人文学术领域。然而，随着其传播，普适设计的主张往往被视为常识。由于这一概念在很大程度上是缺乏历史背景和理论支持的。除了少数例外，人文学科和社会科学领域的批判性方法尚未被应用于探讨普适设计的干预、可能性和策略。
Global attention to Universal Design has heightened since the late 1990s. Translated into at least 11 langutages, including Dutch, French, German, Bahasa Indonesia, Italian, Japanese, Korean, Norsk (Norwegian), Portuguese, Spanish, and Swedish, the "Principles of Universal Design" and the concept they elucidate appear as mandates in the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Disabled Persons. International conferences attract networks of experts, designers, and researchers from Japan, Norway, and India, among other countries, to explore Universal Design alongside approaches termed "Inclusive Design," "Design for All," and "Design for the Lifespan." Advocates claim that these terms provide nonuniversalist alternatives for the philosophy that Universal Design describes. But like the barrier work of distinguishing between Universal Design and the ADA, the purported equivalency of these terms presupposes an ideal concept and approach that simply awaits a better title. Significant empirical questions remain, however, about whether these terms are constant in their meaning, scope, and practice as they circulate globally.
自 20 世纪 90 年代末以来，全球对通用设计的关注不断增加。将“通用设计原则”翻译成至少 11 种语言，包括荷兰语、法语、德语、印尼语、意大利语、日语、韩语、挪威语、葡萄牙语、西班牙语和瑞典语，这些原则及其阐释的概念在联合国残疾人权利公约中被视为法规。国际会议吸引了来自日本、挪威、印度等国家的专家、设计师和研究人员，共同探讨通用设计以及被称为“包容性设计”、“面向所有人的设计”和“终身设计”的方法。倡导者声称，这些术语提供了通用设计所描述的哲学的非通用主义替代方案。但就像区分通用设计和 ADA 的障碍工作一样，这些术语的所谓等同性假设了一个理想的概念和方法，只等待一个更好的名称。然而，关于这些术语在全球范围内的含义、范围和实践是否保持恒定的重要经验问题仍然存在。
While all these approaches may aspire toward a more accessible world, their justifica tions, strategies, and conceptions of users transform across historical and geographic contexts. historically contingent, alize built worlds. Western and often distinctly US American ideas lave shaped how dematerilawmakers, and designers understand the figure of the user. To mark the unmark how experts, capitalized form "Universal Desin" figure of the user. To mark the unmarked, I use the US material "Unes to designate a specific discourse, which congealed fron of spatial planning, consumer ideos scientific discourses, civil rights laws, racialized patterns Universal Design, then, I am referring not to an abstract ideal but to a specific phenomenss and the networks of social relations, expertise, and design experimentation that produced
尽管所有这些方法可能都渴望创造一个更加可访问的世界，但它们的理由、策略和对用户的概念会随着历史和地理背景的不同而发生变化。历史性的依赖于建构的世界。西方，尤其是美国的想法塑造了立法者和设计师如何理解用户的形象。为了标记未标记的内容，我使用美国材料“Unes”来指代一个特定的话语，这个话语凝结了空间规划、消费者观念、科学话语、民权法律、种族化模式等的前沿。因此，当我提到“通用设计”时，我指的不是一个抽象的理想，而是一种特定的现象以及产生这种现象的社会关系、专业知识和设计实验的网络。
That access to public space is a variety of freedom is experimentation that produced it. the twentieth-century United States, movements for race, economic, gender, sexuality, and disability rights focused their efforts on desegregating public space. While the segregationist causes they opposed were often distinct, these movements shared a demand for meaningful spatial citizenship: the right to occupy homes, workplaces, universities, restrooms, courthouses, and cities. Tactics of taking up space, such as marches and sit-ins, made these movements publicly legible. But when it came to legislating civil rights to housing, employment, and education, lawmakers and designers tended to treat the categories of race, class, gender, sexuality, and disability as discrete. Although the idea of "intersectionality" came after the passage of major civil rights legislation in the and '70s, there is another reason that aws and environmental design did not consider that people at the intersections of systems of oppression face unique barriers to exercising rights. The reason had to do with the systems of knowledge and expertise that policy makers enrolled in defining human variation and prescribing ways of containing it. The liberal project of including an ever-widening range of human variation was inseparable from processes of objectification, surveillance, and standardization. As race, gender, class, and especially disability became objects of expert study, scientific legibility shaped the political legibility of architectural inhabitants, users, and citizens.
进入公共空间是一种自由的多样性，是产生它的实验。在二十世纪的美国，种族、经济、性别、性取向和残疾权利运动将他们的努力集中在取消公共空间的种族隔离上。虽然他们反对的种族隔离主义原因通常是不同的，但这些运动共同要求有意义的空间公民权：占据住所、工作场所、大学、洗手间、法院和城市的权利。占据空间的策略，如游行和静坐抗议，使这些运动在公众中变得明显。但是，当涉及立法保障住房、就业和教育的民权时，立法者和设计师往往倾向于将种族、阶级、性别、性取向和残疾等类别视为独立的。尽管“交叉性”这一概念是在 70 年代主要民权立法通过之后出现的，但还有另一个原因，即法律和环境设计没有考虑到处于压迫体系交叉点的人面临独特的行使权利障碍。 这个原因与政策制定者在定义人类变异并规定控制方式时所使用的知识和专业系统有关。自由主义项目包容日益广泛的人类变异，与客体化、监视和标准化过程密不可分。随着种族、性别、阶级，尤其是残疾成为专家研究的对象，科学的可读性塑造了建筑居民、使用者和公民的政治可读性。
Across twentieth-century social justice movements, however, another type of politics, for pere pubtion, focused on knowledge as a site of engagement and transformation. It may appear odd to characterize knowledge as a "site" implying that it is a place. As we typically understand it, knowledge is abstract, immaterial; knowledge describes the world rather than being within it. But what activists knew and what many academic disciplines eventually came to understand, was that knowledge is social, relational, material, and spatially situated. Knowing both reflects and shapes the world. Knowledge, in other words, is a kind of design. Treating knowledge as a contested domain for shaping the world, twentieth-century activists pushed against scientific and liberal conceptions of legible personhood, challenging the neutral, disinterested objectivity of Cold War-era science and asserting alternative wiys of knowing, which tethered accounts of lived marginalization and analyses of historical, political, and cultural systems. These strategies, which I term "epistemic activism," rematerialized not only the built arrangements of segregated space but also the structures of knowledge production itself
在二十世纪的社会正义运动中，另一种政治形式，例如，专注于知识作为参与和转变的场所。将知识描述为一个“场所”可能看起来有点奇怪，因为这暗示着它是一个地方。正如我们通常理解的那样，知识是抽象的、非物质的；知识描述世界，而不是存在于其中。但活动人士知道的，以及许多学科最终也明白的，是知识是社会的、关系的、物质的，以及空间上的。知识既反映又塑造世界。换句话说，知识是一种设计。将知识视为塑造世界的有争议领域，二十世纪的活动人士抵制了科学和自由主义对可读人格的概念，挑战了冷战时代科学的中立、不感兴趣的客观性，并主张了其他认知方式，这些方式将生活边缘化的描述与历史、政治和文化体系的分析联系在一起。 这些策略，我称之为“认识论行动主义”，不仅重新实现了隔离空间的建筑安排，也重新构建了知识生产的结构
Access-knowledge challenged the norms of embodiment around which architectural design coheres. In the post-World War II era, proponents of barrier-free design argued that the world had been designed with an average user in mind, but the changing nature of human embodiment through war, industrial accidents, and medical advances demanded a new strategy. Unlike High Modernist architects, who defined "good design" in terms of standardization and uniformity, proponents of barrier-friee design argued that if architects design a world disability in mind, this built-in access would benefit "all" people, even adding value for with disability users.
访问知识挑战了建筑设计凝聚的关于具象化的规范。在二战后的时代，无障碍设计的支持者认为，这个世界是以普通用户为中心设计的，但人类具象化的变化，如战争、工业事故和医学进步，需要一种新的策略。与高现代主义建筑师不同，他们将“好设计”定义为标准化和一致性，无障碍设计的支持者认为，如果建筑师以残疾人为考虑对象设计世界，这种内置的无障碍将使“所有”人受益，甚至为残疾用户增加价值。

Despite claims that accessibity bentions of productive citizenship, which defined liberal situated in through the capacity for productive labor, as well as through the evident fruits of belonging teath accumulation, homeownership, and consumerism. Midcentury advocates that labor: weat design claimed that accessible built environments would help to rehabilitate for barrier-free design clamed that accessible buit enved soldiers and workers, contributing to the common good, public safety, and national
尽管声称可访问性弯曲了生产性公民身份的概念，这一概念在自由主义中的定位是通过生产劳动的能力以及通过属于积累、拥有住房和消费主义的明显成果来实现的。中世纪倡导者声称劳动：设计声称可访问的建筑环境将有助于康复，以实现无障碍设计的目标，声称可访问的建筑环境将有助于康复士兵和工人，为共同利益、公共安全和国家资本做出贡献。公共大学和私人、单户住宅隔离，无障碍设计研究。

capital. Public universities and the private, single-family homes segregation, garrier-free design research.
资本。公共大学和私人、单户住宅隔离，无障碍设计研究。
foci of barrier-free design research. The pory atrocales distinguish Universal Design from barrier-removal, arguing that the former is porary advocates distringecal approach to design for everyone, while the latter is situated in legal a broad, creative, extralegal approace only on disabled users. Before barrier-free design became a buresucratic term for codes and standards, its discourses and claims were nearly identical to those of contemporary Universal Design. It was only in the post-civil rights era, when laws such as the ADA emerged to mandate and enforce barrier-free design, that it became possible such as the to frame it as narrow and be to barrier-free design. These mutually constitutive approaches and their shared proponents, experts, and knowledge bases were instead part of a broader experiment with how to frame, negotiate, and deploy the project of design with disabled users in mind.
无障碍设计研究的焦点。Pory atrocales 区分了通用设计与消除障碍，认为前者是为所有人设计的一种当代倡导者的区别性方法，而后者则是坐落在法律范畴之内的一种广泛、创造性、超法律的方法，仅关注残疾用户。在无障碍设计成为法规和标准的官僚术语之前，其论述和主张几乎与当代通用设计的相同。直到民权时代后期，像 ADA 这样的法律出现，强制执行无障碍设计，才有可能将其框定为狭窄的无障碍设计。这些相互构成的方法及其共同的倡导者、专家和知识基础，实际上是设计项目如何考虑残疾用户的更广泛实验的一部分，涉及如何构建、协商和部署设计项目。

Gripping Universal Design
紧握通用设计

How does Universal Design relate to the concept of disability? Post-ADA narratives insist that Universal Design is disability-neutral: the focus is not on disability but rather on everyone. This claim is confusing, however, because it does not clarify what "everyone" means in a world that devalues particular bodies. Similar to the idea that we live in a post-racial society, world copression wherein race is a fiction and "egibe belonging in a populaimmaterial, terms such as everyone give the impal ways of knowing. Accordingly, it is often tion is unmediated by historical, political, or social ways of knowing. Accordingly, it is often taken as common sense that because aging is a form of impairment, everyone is or will be disabled at some point. It follows that better design will benefit not only our prese
通用设计如何与残疾概念相关？ADA 后叙事坚称通用设计是与残疾无关的：重点不在残疾，而在于每个人。 然而，这种说法令人困惑，因为它没有澄清在一个贬低特定身体的世界中，“每个人”意味着什么。类似于我们生活在一个后种族社会的想法，世界压缩其中种族是虚构的，而“属于人群的归属感在一种物质上，术语如每个人给予了认识的重要方式。因此，通常认为因为老化是一种损伤形式，每个人都或将在某个时候残疾。由此推断，更好的设计将使我们的现在不仅受益于我们的现在
ul, able-bodied selves but also the solle the smooth, predictable temporalities,
的，健全的自我，也将使平稳，可预测的时间性，

whose ways of being and movirg find friction with our social and buseditions of inequality, the whose present and future belogging has been shaped by past conditions of mequality, the this of the calls into question foundational models, epistemologies, and ethical positions.
他们的生存和移动方式与我们社会和 buseditions 的不平等摩擦，他们的现在和未来的归属感已经被过去的不平等条件所塑造，这个问题呼唤了基础模型、认识论和伦理立场。
The history of access-knowledge, of which Universal Design is a part, is also the history of the field of disability studies. Around the time that Mace first wrote of Universal Design in the mid-1980s, the field emerged as a kind of epistemic activism, working within academia to challenge dominant medical and rehabilitation models of impairment and pathology. The generative intervention of disability studies paralleled (and later allied with) the rise of critical race, feminist, and queer studies from social movements. At the core of disability studies, the field's foundational "social model" translated the insights of US and UK disability activists into an academic theory. 2 . 10
通识设计所属的获取知识的历史也是残疾研究领域的历史。在梅斯（Mace）首次在 1980 年代中期提出通识设计的同时，这一领域作为一种认识论活动出现，致力于在学术界挑战主流的医学和康复模式对残疾和病理的看法。残疾研究的创造性干预与社会运动中批判种族、女性和酷儿研究的兴起相似（后来结盟）。残疾研究的核心是该领域基础性的“社会模式”，将美国和英国残疾活动人士的见解转化为学术理论。
As the social model is often described, disability is a construct of built and social environments rather than pathology requiring cure or functional limitation demanding rehabilitation. Two decades earlier, however, rehabilitation experts developed a similar understanding of disability as an environmentally produced phenomenon, arguing that inaccessible built environments exclude disabled people from accessing necessary services, work, and public participation. These experts emerged from within the rehabilitation profession, used estab fished research methods in their field, and worked with architects and builders to produce the first US accessibility standard, ANSI A117.1. Barrier-free design was a rehabilitation project, aimed at engineering more productive workers and citizens. In the 1970s, disability activists pushed back against rehabilitation researchers and their assumptions that disability is a failure of human performance, and thus a problem in need of elimination. While they agreed that disability is a socially and architecturally produced disadvantage, activists asserted theed their lived experiences made them better experts on the subject of disability and challenged the rehabilitation norm of compulsory productive citizenship. What distinguished the social model from rehabilitation, then, was not its focus on environmental precipitants of inequality but rather a new disability epistemology. Disability studies grew around this epistemology deemphasizing medical and scientific knowledge in favor of critical theory, qualitative dat and humanistic texts. But in the early twenty-first century around the time the dat, sal Design became a predominantly disability-neutral discourse, critical and crip theories of disability emerged to challenge the social model for overemphasizing the environmental construction of disability oppression over embodied experiences of disablement."2 "Crip," reclamation of the term "cripple" dating to the 1970s independent living movement, resist mperatives for normalization and assimilation. Crip theories contribute that disability is valuable cultural identity, a source of knowledge, and a basis for relationality.
正如社会模式经常描述的那样，残疾是建筑和社会环境的构建，而不是需要治愈的病理或需要康复的功能限制。然而，二十年前，康复专家对残疾有了类似的理解，认为残疾是一种环境产生的现象，认为无法进入的建筑环境排除了残疾人获取必要服务、工作和公共参与的机会。这些专家来自康复行业，他们在自己领域使用了成熟的研究方法，并与建筑师和建筑商合作制定了第一个美国无障碍标准 ANSI A117.1。无障碍设计是一个康复项目，旨在培养更多生产力更高的工作者和公民。在 20 世纪 70 年代，残疾活动家反击了康复研究人员及其残疾是人类表现失败的假设，因此是需要消除的问题。 尽管他们一致认为残疾是社会和建筑上产生的劣势，但活动人士坚称他们的生活经验使他们成为残疾主题上更好的专家，并挑战了康复范式中强制性生产性公民身份的规范。那么，社会模式与康复的区别不在于其关注不平等的环境诱因，而在于一种新的残疾认识论。残疾研究围绕这种认识论发展，减少了医学和科学知识的重要性，转而偏向批判理论、定性数据和人文主义文本。但在 21 世纪初，随着社会设计成为主要的残疾中立话语，批判和残疾理论开始挑战社会模式，认为其过分强调残疾压迫的环境构建，而忽视了残疾体验的实体经历。"Crip"是对 20 世纪 70 年代独立生活运动中"cripple"一词的重新定义，抵制了规范化和同化的要求。 跛者理论认为残疾是有价值的文化身份，是知识的源泉，也是关系的基础。
Rather than focusing exclusively on environmental inequality, the critical disability turn adilesses ideology, political economy, and cultural systems responsible for characterizing disability as disqualification. Unlike crip theories, disability-neutral Universal Design discourses often reference rehabilitating notions of human performance and functional limitation, tak ing for granted that restoring function improves productivity and is thus a self-evident good. But by framing Universal Design as a productivity-enhancing feature of built environments, these discourses reduce the critical project of access-knowledge to the status of a rehabilita tion technology for disabled users and an enhancement for nondisabled people. Accordingly, onstructs such as limitation and enhancement, far from neutral or self-evident, produce "depoliticized" perception of disability, which, Alison Kafer explains, treats as common sense the notion that disability is a "problem to be eradicated."26 Paradoxically, depoliticized and neutralized approaches to disability make it possible to imagine a world without disability in it. Shifting toward a more value-explicit, intentional, and crip understanding of disability, we can situate access-knowledge in relation to the liberal project of normalizing public space, assimilating misfit bodies into public life, creating reserves of productive labor, segregating the unproductive, and, as in the case of eugenics, eliminating the physical presence of disability in the world.
与专注于环境不平等相比，关键的残疾转向批判性地处理将残疾定性为不合格的意识形态、政治经济和文化体系。与残疾理论不同，残疾中立的通用设计论述经常提及恢复人类表现和功能限制的概念，认为恢复功能可以提高生产力，因此是不言而喻的好事。然而，通过将通用设计框定为建筑环境的提高生产力特征，这些论述将访问知识的关键项目降低到残疾用户的康复技术和非残疾人的增强的地位。因此，诸如限制和增强之类的构想，远非中立或不言而喻，产生了对残疾的“非政治化”感知，即，艾莉森·凯弗（Alison Kafer）解释，将残疾视为“应该被根除的问题”的常识。矛盾的是，对残疾的非政治化和中立化方法使得人们可以想象一个没有残疾的世界。 转向更加明确、有意识和残疾理解的价值观，我们可以将获取知识置于自由主义规范化公共空间的项目中，将不合群的身体融入公共生活，创造生产劳动力储备，隔离无生产力者，并且，如优生学的情况一样，在世界上消除残疾的身体存在。
Crip theory, too, requires a more robust account of the politics of knowing-making. A core assumption persists that accessibility and rehabilitation are cpistemologically discrete. Well-rehearsed arguments-that the problem is not unrehabilitated bodies but the lack of access--have reproduced the social model as a kind of common sense and Universal Design as a metaphor for meaningful access. In one sense, these arguments demand accountable knowing-making. As Jay Dolmage has productively explored it, meaningful access should go beyond piecemeal efforts at "retrofit" and "accommodation," addressing knowledge, values, ideologies, and systems. This idea resonates with the generative notion of "collective ss." offered by contemporary organizers in the disability justice movement, which is led by disabled people of color. Universal Design's open-ended, creative promise, its unfinby disa qualities and "ongoing negotiation[s]" inspire projects of both individual and collective 1sticess, in the sense of going beyond the technical aspects of inclusion to address broader sysrems and ideas. The sticking point here, however, is that the material world and the social arrangements within it are not just abstract ideals. Working toward meaningful inclusion does not make the conditions of its materialization any less reliant on the politics of knowing The social model, along with crip theories that treat accessibility as an alternative to medical knowing, offered a first wave of disability theorizing that I call "access studies." Here, I extend this work into what I term "critical access studies"; a relatively new field that challenges the treatment of access as a "self-evident good.".".
跛行理论也需要更加全面的认知制造政治解释。一个核心假设仍然存在，即可及性和康复在认识论上是不同的。经过反复演练的论点——问题不在于未经康复的身体，而在于缺乏获取——已经将社会模式作为一种常识和通用设计作为有意义获取的隐喻。在某种意义上，这些论点要求负责任的认知制造。正如杰伊·多尔马奇（Jay Dolmage）所积极探讨的，有意义的获取应该超越“临时修补”和“适应”，涉及知识、价值观、意识形态和系统。这个想法 resonates with 当代残障正义运动中由有色人种残障者领导的“集体 ss.”的概念。通用设计的开放、创造性的承诺，其未完成的残障特质和“持续的协商”激发了个人和集体 1sticess 项目，意味着超越包容的技术方面，解决更广泛的系统和观念。 但是，这里的关键是，物质世界和其中的社会安排不仅仅是抽象理想。朝着有意义的包容努力并不会使其实现的条件不再依赖于认知政治。社会模式以及将可及性视为医学认知的替代品的残疾理论提供了我称之为“获取研究”的第一波残疾理论化。在这里，我将这项工作延伸到我所称之为“关键获取研究”的领域；这是一个相对较新的领域，挑战将获取视为“不言而喻的好处”的处理方式。
Black disability scholar Chris Bell argues that disability studies fails to "engage issues of race and ethnicity in a substantive capacity, thereby entrenching whiteness as its constitutive underpinning.,"33 Bell's critique applies to both access studies and critical access studies in their current formations. Despite unsettling medical norms of embodiment, access studies frequently centers liberal disability rights perspectives toward race, class, and gender oppression, and critical access studies has largely failed to address issues of whiteness, gender normativity or class privilege, despite rejecting the mandates of able-bodiedness. Although access knowledge was a critical project aimed at unsettling norms of the user, I argue that our contemporary understanding of access has been shaped by historical perceptions of the user as a white, middle-class, productive citizen.
黑人残疾学者克里斯·贝尔认为，残疾研究未能“以实质性的方式涉及种族和族裔问题，从而将白人作为其构成性基础。” 贝尔的批评适用于当前形式的准入研究和批判性准入研究。尽管打破了身体认知的医学规范，准入研究经常将自由残疾权利观点置于种族、阶级和性别压迫的中心位置，而批判性准入研究在很大程度上未能解决白人、性别规范或阶级特权等问题，尽管拒绝了健全身体的要求。尽管准入知识是一个旨在打破用户规范的关键项目，但我认为我们对准入的当代理解已经受到了将用户视为白人、中产阶级、有生产力公民的历史认知的影响。

The User and the Norm
用户与规范

Science and technology studies (STS) scholars and architectural historians propose that in the twentieth century, the user was both a subject and an object of knowledge. Since antiquity, architects imagined the inhabitant as an ideal or universal body reflecting cultural ideals of beauty and proportion. Unlike the universal architectural inhabitant, the nineteenth- and twentieth-century figure of the user signified a range of variation. Statisticians, industrial scientists, and engineers identified this wide-ranging variation, termed the "human factor," as an unpredictable threat to industrial, military, and other technological systems. Studying this threat would enable its smooth assimilation into the machinery of production. As a scientific understanding of human diversity enabled the design of increasingly productive, efficient systems, flexible design for a range of users became the stuff of standardization and normalization
科技研究学者和建筑历史学家提出，在二十世纪，用户既是知识的主体也是客体。自古以来，建筑师将居民想象为体现文化美和比例理想的理想或普遍身体。与普遍的建筑居民不同，十九和二十世纪的用户形象代表了一系列变化。统计学家、工业科学家和工程师将这种广泛变化，称为“人因素”，视为对工业、军事和其他技术系统的不可预测威胁。研究这种威胁将使其顺利融入生产机器。对人类多样性的科学理解使得设计越来越高效的系统成为可能，为一系列用户设计灵活的设计成为标准化和规范化的内容。
Concepts of human variation, disability, and injury configured the user as a site of human engineering and rehabilitation. Scientific managers such as Frank and L.1lian Gilbreth turned their attention to the injured soldier as a body amenable to productive citizenship, a unit of nation, industry, and war carried from one engineered system to another. Human factors research followed the disabled veteran into postwar civilian life. Before the twentieth century, the need for accessible design as a matter of public policy was unthinkable because disabled people were segregated from public space by eugenicist "ugly laws" (as historian Susan Schweik has shown), confined in institutions, and hence illegible as public citizens. Accessknowledge bridged human factors research, ergonomics, and postwar rehabilitation cultures, which brought particular disabled bodies - often white, male, physically disabled soldiers rather than people of color, women, or mentally disabled people-into public legibility as both users and citizens. As Anna Carden-Coyne, David Serlin, and Beth Linker have argued, rehabilitation brought the disabled user into public view by marrying bodily reconstruction to postwar efforts to rebuild the nation.
人类变异、残疾和伤害的概念将用户构建为人类工程和康复的场所。弗兰克和 L.1lian 吉尔布雷斯等科学管理者将注意力转向受伤的士兵，将其视为一个可以成为生产性公民的身体，一个从一个工程系统带到另一个工程系统的国家、工业和战争单位。人类因素研究随着残疾退伍军人进入战后的民用生活。在 20 世纪之前，作为公共政策的无障碍设计的需求是不可想象的，因为残疾人被优生学家的“丑陋法律”（正如历史学家苏珊·施韦克所展示的）隔离在公共空间之外，被关押在机构中，因此无法被视为公民。 接触知识架起了人类因素研究、人类工程学和战后康复文化之间的桥梁，将特定的残疾身体——通常是白人、男性、身体残障士兵，而不是有色人种、女性或精神残障者——作为用户和公民呈现在公众视野中。 正如安娜·卡登-科恩（Anna Carden-Coyne）、大卫·瑟林（David Serlin）和贝丝·林克（Beth Linker）所主张的，康复将残疾用户引入公众视野，将身体重建与战后重建国家的努力结合在一起。
Access-knowledge was an experimental project. At every phase, experts and "user engaged in new types of research, experimented with design features, and debated standard of practice that could shape mainstream design discourses. In the mid-twentieth century industrial engineer Henry Dreyfuss ushered in a new paradigm of "human engineering", US rowing human statistics gathered by military sources, physical anthropologists, and eugenicists to offer designers data as a tool for design. But flexible design for a range of users always referred to standardized forms of knowledge and conceptions of a vulnerable and manipus lable body, whose disabilities required elimination through better environmental design. As a postwar intervention, barrier-free design challenged the idea that physical able-bodiedness is a prerequisite to occupying built space, but proponents did not challenge the imperatives of normalization. This was evident in the experts enlisted to create accessibility guidelines: architects and builders worked with rehabilitation scientists, industrial designers, and scientific managers in tandem to produce barrier-free environments that would enhance productivity and human performance. Disabled soldiers entering universities as students under the G.I. Bill, most of whom were white disabled men, became natural objects of research for early accessibility guidelines. A rehabilitation program for students at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign served as the testing ground for these guidelines. A second prototypical user, the white, disabled housewife, followed, as rehabilitation research turned to the home as a domain of engineerable labor
访问知识是一个实验性项目。在每个阶段，专家和“用户”参与了新类型的研究，尝试了设计特征，并讨论了可能塑造主流设计话语的实践标准。在二十世纪中叶，工业工程师亨利·德雷弗斯（Henry Dreyfuss）开创了一种新的“人类工程学”范式，美国划船人类统计数据由军事来源、生物人类学家和优生学家收集，为设计师提供数据作为设计工具。但是，为一系列用户设计灵活的设计总是指标准化的知识形式和对脆弱和可操纵身体的概念，这些残疾需要通过更好的环境设计来消除。作为战后干预，无障碍设计挑战了身体健全是占据建筑空间的先决条件的观念，但支持者并没有挑战规范化的必要性。 显而易见的是，专家们被征用来制定无障碍指南：建筑师和建筑师与康复科学家、工业设计师和科学经理一起协作，共同打造无障碍环境，以提高生产力和人类表现。根据《退伍军人援助法案》作为学生进入大学的残疾士兵，其中大多数是白人残疾男性，成为早期无障碍指南研究的自然对象。伊利诺伊大学厄巴纳-香槟分校的学生康复计划成为这些指南的试验基地。第二个典型用户是白人残疾家庭主妇，随着康复研究转向家庭作为可工程化劳动的领域。
Midcentury access-knowledge tethered the project of inclusive public space to the objec tification of disabled people in scientific research. But soon, users began to push back. In the 1960 s, the independent living movement challenged the authority of nondisabled experts to know and design for disabled people. But rather than reject rehabilitation or architecture outright1 activists worked within these fields to position users as experts, experiment with new technologies of access1 and reject productivity as a requirement of citizenship. Where the independent living movement intervened into rehabilitation practice, a new field of environmental design research (EDR) injected the architecture profession with more critical approaches to the user. Although these strategies of epistemic activism took place below the surface of legible protests and sit-ins, their tactics, frames, and design practices redesigned the normative basis of access-knowledge.
中世纪的获取知识将包容性公共空间项目与科学研究中残疾人的客体化联系在一起。但很快，用户开始反击。上世纪 60 年代，独立生活运动挑战了非残疾专家了解和为残疾人设计的权威。但活动人士并没有完全拒绝康复或建筑，而是在这些领域内工作，将用户定位为专家，尝试新的获取技术，并拒绝生产力作为公民身份的要求。独立生活运动介入康复实践时，一个新的环境设计研究领域（EDR）向建筑专业注入了更具批判性的用户方法。尽管这些认识活动策略发生在可读的抗议和静坐之下，但它们的战术、框架和设计实践重新设计了获取知识的规范基础。
As this brief history shows, the user is a value-laden figure with significant history and politics. Commonsense claims that Universal Design is simply a form of good design tend to ignore that the legibility of disabled people as users has been contingent on their historic legibility as scientific objects, citizens, and workers, whose white, middle-class privileges remained unmarked. These claims also tell us very little about the entangled experiments and reiterations through which Universal Design materialized, or how these sedimentations made it a seemingly coherent, static, and namable practice in the late twentieth century. This history matters not only for disability studies but also for the broader fields of American studies, science and technology studies, and design studies because the figure of the user has been a node around which normalcy, fitting, productivity, and national belonging are articulated.
正如这个简短的历史所显示的，用户是一个充满价值观的人物，具有重要的历史和政治意义。常识认为，通用设计只是一种良好设计的形式，往往忽视残疾人作为用户的可辨识性取决于他们作为科学对象、公民和工作者的历史可辨识性，而这些人的白人、中产阶级特权并未被标记。这些说法也很少提及通用设计是如何通过纠缠在一起的实验和重复而实现的，或者这些沉淀如何使其在二十世纪末成为一个看似连贯、静态和可命名的实践。 这段历史不仅对残疾研究领域重要，也对美国研究、科学技术研究和设计研究等更广泛的领域重要，因为用户这一形象一直是正常、适应、生产力和国家归属等概念围绕的中心节点。

Notes 注释

  1. As a critical concept, "nisfit" is elaborated by Rosemarie Garland-Thomson, "Misfits: A Fetminist
    作为一个批判性概念，“不合适”由罗斯玛丽·加兰-汤姆森（Rosemarie Garland-Thomson）阐释，“不合适：一种女权主义

1 elaborate my theory of normate and mistit as ukers of built ervirompents in wimis not designed. ing Collective Access: A Feminist Disability Theory of Universal Design,", Disadilitit' Studities Quaterterly 33, no. 4 (2013), hittp://dsq-sds.org/article/view/3871/3411. use the term "disabled people," and occasionally "people with disabilities," throughout this book. It use the wy society and claim disability as an identity. "Person-first language, such as people wich disabimices, is often associated with medical and rehabilitative models, which identify personiood as separate trom disabled embodiment and experience. With the exception ofoted to refer to cognitively and physically
我详细阐述了我关于规范和误解的理论，作为未经设计的建筑环境的使用者。在《集体获取：通用设计的女性残障理论》一文中，Disability Studies Quarterly 33，第 4 期（2013 年），使用术语“残疾人”，偶尔也用“残疾人”，在本书中贯穿始终。它使用社会的方式，并将残疾视为一种身份。“人先语言”，如患有残疾的人，通常与医疗和康复模式相关联，这些模式将人格与残疾的具体表现和经历分开。除了用于指代认知和身体残疾者。

disabled people. When describing disabled people, " "there are also generational difin public. Ronald Mace, for instance, used the term "isibled person. 'or as identity term in the 1970 s, ferences in term preferences and meanings. Altiongh cip emerged personal identification, and group terences more recently gained popularity within academic discourse, personal identification, and group
当描述残疾人时，“在公共领域也存在世代差异。例如，Ronald Mace 在 1970 年代使用了术语“残疾人”作为身份术语，对术语偏好和含义存在世代差异。尽管个人认同最近在学术话语中变得更受欢迎，个人认同和群体
it has 最近在学术话语中变得更受欢迎，个人认同和群体
affiliation. 隶属关系。
Disability social movement scholars often identify direct action as a key tactic for disability activenon. See use their bodies as evidence that disability is a socially produced, rather than medical," phenomenon. See
残疾社会运动学者通常将直接行动视为残疾人积极行动的关键策略。他们利用自己的身体作为证据，表明残疾是一种社会产生的现象，而非医学上的。见
used 使用
Tom Shakespeare, "Disabled People'
汤姆·莎士比亚，《残疾人'
and Society 8, no. .
和社会 8，第 号。
On the politics of disability in post-ADA narratives of design, see Aimi Hamrase, "Uni.
关于 ADA 后设计叙事中残疾政治，请参见 Aimi Hamrase，《Uni.
the Problen of 'Post-Disability' Ideology." Design turi Cnlture 8, no. 3 (2016): . University Press As disability scholars such as Georgina Klecge, Sighir Unsect (Newlan view") are part of the culture of 1999) have argued, optical metaphors tor nnowicedge (sum a way of knowing. My use of these metadisability discrimmation, elevatting the primacy phors here is deliberate, however, as this book is concerneder.
“‘后残疾’意识形态的问题。”设计文化 8，第 3 期（2016 年）： 。正如残疾学者乔治娜·克莱奇（Georgina Klecge）、西吉尔·昂塞克特（Sighir Unsect）（纽兰视角）所主张的那样，光学隐喻是一种认识方式。然而，我在这里使用这些元残疾歧视，提升了主导地位。这里使用这些元残疾歧视，提升了主导地位。然而，我在这里使用这些元残疾歧视，提升了主导地位。然而，我在这里使用这些元残疾歧视，提升了主导地位。然而，我在这里使用这些元残疾歧视，提升了主导地位。然而，我在这里使用这些元残疾歧视，提升了主导地位。然而，我在这里使用这些元残疾歧视，提升了主导地位。然而，我在这里使用这些元残疾歧视，提升了主导地位。然而，我在这里使用这些元残疾歧视，提升了主导地位。然而，我在这里使用这些元残疾歧视，提升了主导地位。然而，我在这里使用这些元残疾歧视，提升了主导地位。然而，我在这里使用这些元残疾歧视，提升了主导地位。然而，我在这里使用这些元残疾歧视，提升了主导地位。然而，我在这里使用这些元残疾歧视，提升了主导地位。然而，我在这里使用这些元残疾歧视，提升了主导地位。然而，我在这里使用这些元残疾歧视，提升了主导地位。然而，我在这里使用这些元残疾歧视，提升了主导地位。然而，我在这里使用这些元残疾歧视，提升了主导地位。然而，我在这里使用这些元残疾歧视，提升了主导地位。然而，我在这里使用这些元残疾歧视，提升了主导地位。然而，我在这里使用这些元残疾歧视，提升了主导地位。然而，我在这里使用这些元残疾歧视，提升了主导地位。然而，我在这里使用这些元残疾歧视，提升了主导地位。然而，我在这里使用这些元残疾歧视，提升了主导地位。然而，我在这里使用这些元残疾歧视，提升了主导地位。然而，我在这里使用这些元残疾歧视，提升了主导地位。然而，我在这里使用这些元残疾歧视，提升了主导地位。然而，我在这里使用这些元残疾歧视，提升了主导地位。然而，我在这里使用这些元残疾歧视，提升了主导地位。然而，我在这里使用这些元残疾歧视，提升了主导地位。然而，我在这里使用这些元残疾歧视，提升了主导地位。然而，我在这里使用这些元残疾歧视，提升了主导地位。然而，我在这里使用这些元残疾歧视，提升了主导地位。然而，我在这里使用这些元残疾歧视，提升了主导地位。然而，我在这里使用这些元残疾歧视，提升了主导地位。然而，我在这里使用这些元残疾歧视，提升了主导地位。然而，我在这里使用这些元残疾歧视，提升了主导地位。然而，我在这里使用这些元残疾歧视，提升了主导地位。然而，我在这里使用这些元残疾歧视，提升了主导地位。然而，我在这里使用这些元残疾歧视，提升了主导地位。然而，我在这里使用这些元残疾歧视，提升了主导地位。然而，我在这里使用这些元残疾歧视，提升了主导地位。然而，我在这里使用这些元残疾歧视，提升了主导地位。然而，我在这里使用这些元残疾歧视，提升了主导地位。然而，我在这里使用这些元残疾歧视，提升了主导地位。然而，我在这里使用这些元残疾歧视，提升了主导地位。然而，我在这里使用这些元残疾歧视，提升了主导地位。然而，我在这里使用这些元残疾歧视，提升了主导地位。然而，我在这里使用这些元残疾歧视，提升了主导地位。然而，我在这里使用这些元残疾歧视，提升了主导地位。然而，我在这里使用这些元残疾歧视，提升了主导地位。然而，我在这里使用这些元残疾歧视，提升了主导地位。然而，我在这里使用这些元残疾歧视，提升了主导地位。

Most analyses focus on the ADe Mette enviromments and servics. the ADA: Situating Disabity in Ars show

that eight out of ten disabled people lace nondisabled population. See certert and former istics," Department of Labor Sime Sam Bagenstos attributes the ADA's failures to the "inherent limitations Department of Justice attorney sam Bne provide the "social welfare" necessary to overcome barriers. of antidiscrimimation "D." Livility Lwe Not Enough to Combat Discrimination," New" York Timkes See Sam Bagenstos, Disabiw, IDA Title III to achieve accessible public accominodations is attributed July 26, 2015. The tailures of ADA atre eates and businesses, argues one disability law seholar. See Ruth

Colker, "ADA Colker，“ADA
(2000): 378 .
  1. An earlier version of 早期版本
    Disability'Ideology." 残疾'Ideology."
S. Ronald Mace 萨·罗纳德·梅斯
My concept of access-knowledge references Foucault's "power-knowledge." See Michel Foucault, Dis-
我对获取知识的概念参考了福柯的“权力-知识”。参见米歇尔·福柯，《监狱的诞生》，艾伦·谢里丹译，纽约：维纳书店，1975 年，26-8 页。获取知识是一种可理解性制度，或者福柯所称的“设备”，是一个“完全异质的整体，由言说、制度、建筑形式、监管决策、法律、表面上的和不言而喻的东西组成。这些是设备的要素。设备本身是
(1985): 148 cipline and Purisich: Birth of the Prison, trans. Alan Sheridan (New York: Vintage Books. 1975), 26-8. Access-knowledec is a regime of intelligibility, or what Foucault calls a "dispositf," a "thoroughly heterogeneous ensemble consisting of discourses, institutions, architectural forms, regulatory decisions, laws, ale surt the said as much as the unsaid. Such are the elements of the apparatus. The apparatus itself is the

system of (New York: Pantheon Books, 1980), 194. Although access-knowledge tits Foucaults description of (New York. Fantionent I avoid using terms such as "biopower" and "governmentality" because their overuse often obscures meaning. Disability scholirs adopting Foucault's notion of power-knowledge overuse often obscures medge a mere instrument of power relations, rather than taking the politics of knowledge seriously. My approach to entangled knowing-making is more epistemological. Closely affiliated with Foucault's archaeological method, 1 locate knowledge-production as itself an exertise of power. See Aimi Hamraic, "Historical Epistemology as Disability Studies Methodology: From the Models Framework to Foucault's Archaeology of Cure," Foucault Studies, no. 19 (June 2015): 108-34, This approach builds on ferminist technoscience scholarship, which has deployed archaeological methods (offen referred to as "historical ontology" or "historical epistemology") to study the relationships
系统（纽约：潘西恩书籍，1980 年），194。尽管访问知识的福柯描述（纽约。我避免使用诸如“生命权力”和“治理能力”之类的术语，因为它们的过度使用常常会模糊意义。残疾学者采纳福柯关于权力知识的概念往往会过度使用，而不是认真对待知识的政治。我对纠缠的知识制造更具认识论性。与福柯的考古方法密切相关，我将知识生产本身视为一种权力行使。参见艾米·哈姆雷克，“历史认识论作为残疾研究方法：从模型框架到福柯的治愈考古学”，福柯研究，第 19 期（2015 年 6 月）：108-34，这种方法建立在女性主义技术科学学术研究的基础上，后者采用考古学方法（通常被称为“历史本体论”或“历史认识论”）来研究关系

Wowren Workers (Durham, NC: Duke Univessity Press, 2006).
女性工作者（杜克大学出版社，2006 年）。
  1. Molly Follette Story, James L. Mueller, and Ronald L. Mace, The Universal Design File: Designtugg for P ple of All Ages and Abilities (Raleigh, NC: Center for Universal Design, North Carolina State Univer . Mace,
    莫莉·福莱特·斯托里，詹姆斯·L·穆勒和罗纳德·L·梅斯，《通用设计文件：为所有年龄和能力的人设计》（北卡罗来纳州罗利：北卡罗来纳州立大学通用设计中心，梅斯，
  2. The Universal Design,"147-52,
    通用设计，“147-52，
see John Salmen, "The Differences Between Accessibtity and the book. For examples of these debate, letter 1, no. 7 (1994): 2; Abir Mtullick and Edward Steinfeld, "Universal Design: What If Is stien New: Isn't," Iunopation 16, no. 1 (1997): 14-24; S. Iwarsson and A. Stâhl, "Accessibility, Usability and What I sal Design-Positioning and Definition of Concepts Describing Person-Fnvironment Relat UniverDisatbilify and Rehalililitation 25, no. 2 (2003): 57-66; Denise Levine, Universal Desien New York (B) NY: Center for Inclusive Design and Environmental Access, 2003), 8; Josh Sifdie, quoted (Buffalo Szenasy, "Accessibility Watch: Q&A with Josh Safdie," Metropolis Magazine, February 2011 in Susal McAdams and Vincent Kostovich, "A Framework and Representation for Universal Product Danic Internutionul Jourmal of Desig" 5, no. 1 (2011): 29-42, www.ijdesign.org/ojs/index.php/IJDesign/asticle view/602/327
见约翰·萨尔曼，“无障碍和书籍之间的区别。有关这些辩论的示例，请参见信件 1，第 7 号（1994 年）：2；阿比尔·穆特利克和爱德华·斯坦菲尔德，“通用设计：如果是斯蒂恩新的：不是”，创新 16，第 1 号（1997 年）：14-24；S·伊瓦尔松和 A·斯塔尔，“可及性、可用性和我所设计的位置和定义描述人-环境关系的概念通用设计-定位和康复 25，第 2 号（2003 年）：57-66；丹尼斯·莱文，纽约通用设计（B）纽约：包容设计和环境准入中心，2003 年），8；乔什·西夫迪，引用（水牛城 Szenasy，“无障碍观察：与乔什·萨夫迪的问答”，《大都会杂志》，2011 年 2 月，见苏萨尔·麦克亚当斯和文森特·科斯托维奇，“通用产品丹尼克国际设计框架和表征” 5，第 1 号（2011 年）：29-42，www.ijdesign.org/ojs/index.php/IJDesign/asticle view/602/327
  1. On "good design" as a commonsense discourse, see Stephen Hayward, "Good Design Is Largely Matter of Common Sense': Questioning the Meaning and Ownership of a Twentieth Century ongely doxy." Journal of Design History 11, no. 3 (1998): 217-33
    有关“好设计”作为常识话语，请参阅斯蒂芬·海沃德（Stephen Hayward）的文章，“好设计在很大程度上是常识问题：质疑二十世纪的意义和所有权。”《设计史杂志》第 11 卷，第 3 期（1998 年）：217-233
  2. John Hockenberry, "Design Is Universil," Metropolis magazine, December 2004
    约翰·霍肯贝瑞（John Hockenberry），《设计是普遍的》，《都市》杂志，2004 年 12 月

Center for Universal Design, North Cadulincsu/design/cud/about_ud/udprinci plestext.lhtny. guages Other Than English," 2008, www.ucsu.edu/ncsu/design/cud/about_ud/udnonenglishpriut
通用设计中心，北卡罗来纳州设计/通用设计/udprinci plestext.lhtny。其他语言，2008 年，www.ucsu.edu/ncsu/design/cud/about_ud/udnonenglishpriut
ples.htinl 17. Science and technology studies (STS), particularly feminist STS, as well as the histories and sociologies
第 17 章。科学技术研究（STS），特别是女性主义 STS，以及科学技术的历史和社会学
of science and technology, grew from these postpositivist approaches, often working as activists within academic discourse by referencing or workmg in concert with activists outside the academy. These relations and their challenges to knowing and making are explored productively in Michelle Murphy,
从这些后实证主义方法中发展出来，通常作为学术话语中的活动分子，通过参考或与学术界之外的活动分子合作。这些关系及其对认知和创造的挑战在米歇尔·墨菲（Michelle Murphy）的作品中得到了富有成效的探讨，
Scizing the Metus of Reproduction: Eutarglemencus of Feurisus Seizing the Meams of Reproducthon: Entanglements of Feminism, Health, und Techthosience (Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2012)
《生殖的元素：女性主义、健康和技术科学的纠缠》（Durham, NC: 杜克大学出版社，2012）
  1. Disability and design scholars, including myself, have made similar arguments about Universal Design "Electriciletralizung approaches. See Hamraie, "Designing Collective Access"; Bess Williamson, Postwar Aome " Using Technology in Postwar America, American Simules 52, no. 1 (2012): 232-3; Elizabeth Ellcessor, "Blurred Lines: Acces sibblity, Disablity, and Detimitional Limmtations, First Moulday 20, no. 9 (2015), htetp://firstmonday.org/ The Society
    残疾和设计学者，包括我自己，在《通用设计“Electriciletralizung 方法方面提出了类似的论点。参见 Hamraie，“设计集体访问”; Bess Williamson，战后 Aome“在战后美国使用技术，美国 Simules 52，第 1 期（2012 年）：232-3; Elizabeth Ellcessor，“模糊界线：可访问性，残疾和定义性限制，第一周一 20，第 9 期（2015 年），htetp://firstmonday.org/社会

Union-afd-history 联合-afd-历史
  1. Union of Physically Impaired Against Segregation, "Policy Statement," 1972, hrtt://disability-studies. Model ofDiestibrary/UPIASUPIAS.pdf; Simon Brisendon, "Independent Living and the Medical Moder of Also in the mid 196 (
    身体残障人士反对隔离联盟，“政策声明”，1972 年，hrtt://disability-studies. Model ofDiestibrary/UPIASUPIAS.pdf; Simon Brisendon，“独立生活和医学模型也在 20 世纪 60 年代中期

Andrew Pope and Andrew Tarlov (Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1991), 309-27.
安德鲁·波普和安德鲁·塔洛夫（华盛顿特区：国家学院出版社，1991 年），309-27。
Theorv, ed. Mairian Corker and Tom Shplestryes Dyck, "Geographies of Disability: Reflecting on New Bew plies: "Disatbed" Bodies and Minds in Sacity and Space, ed. Vera Chouinard, Edward Hall, and Rober phries: "Disablet" Bodies and Minds in Socicty a
Theorv，编辑 Mairian Corker 和 Tom Shplestryes Dyck，“残疾人地理：反思新的贝尔普利斯：‘残疾’身体和心灵在社会和空间中，编辑 Vera Chouinard，Edward Hall 和 Rober phries：‘残疾’身体和心灵在社会中
Witton (Burlingtoon: Ashgate, 2010), 254-5,
Witton（伯灵顿：阿什盖特，2010 年），254-5。
  1. Crip theory originated in disability activism of the civil rights era and continues to be developed outside the academy in the disability justice movement. However, scholars drawing on crip theory since
    跛行理论起源于民权时代的残疾人权利运动，并在残疾人正义运动中继续发展。然而，自从学者们借鉴跛行理论以来
    Wo tor the offered it as a method of analysis, similar to critical race, feminist, or queer frameworks. 2003 have offered it "Quering the Crip or Cripping the Queet? Intersections of Queer and Crip See Cartic Sando Autobiographical Performance," GLQ: A Joumal of Lesbiun witd Giry Strudies 9, nos Identities in 5o51-2 (2003), Stulfies 9, nos. 1-2 (2003): 1-23; Robert McRuer, Crip Theory: Cultural Sigms of (mucemmes tur athd Giry Smelturnil Frout (New York: New York University Press, 2006). The reclamation of "crip" for Disstilitit, Cullumin has been criticized for centralizing physical disability. This critique is important for radical theorizang my amalyss of Unselio disabilities, were most often the objects of barrier-free design research in the mudthose wit entury and later served in leadership roles when it came to redefiming standards. twentieth rimacy to physical disability but to show why access-knowledge foctused on physical disability to gram most of the century. While 1 use "crip" to describe a political orientation, thave bectractices. throuste when disabilities that are considered sensory or cogmitive appear minetaly its the basis of shared Deaf culture offers an example of a cultural model of disability, whicein disa D-Dirksen L. Bauman and benguage and culture and not understood in purely medical (erms. See H-Diksen L. Bniversity of
    他们将其作为一种分析方法，类似于批判性种族、女权主义或酷儿框架。2003 年提出了“扭曲残疾或使酷儿残疾？酷儿和残疾的交叉：卡特里克·桑多自传表演”，《酷儿研究杂志》9 卷，第 1-2 期（2003 年）：1-23；罗伯特·麦克鲁尔，《残疾理论：文化标志的（男性主义和女性主义）（纽约：纽约大学出版社，2006 年）。对于将“残疾”重新定义为 Disstilitit，Cullumin 一词已经受到批评，因为它将身体残疾置于中心位置。这种批评对于我对残疾的激进理论分析至关重要，这些残疾往往是障碍设计研究的对象，在 20 世纪后期担任领导角色，重新定义标准。不是为了强调身体残疾的优先地位，而是为了说明为什么关于身体残疾的获取知识在大部分世纪里占主导地位。虽然我使用“残疾”来描述一种政治取向，但实践已经变得不同。 当被视为感觉或认知障碍时，通过共享聋文化的基础，提供了一个文化模式的残疾示例，这不仅仅是医学术语上的残疾。参见 H-Diksen L.明尼苏达大学出版社，2014 年）。联合、文化、认识论和关系方面。

Mintiesota Press, 2014). The coalitional, cultural, epistemic, and relational aspects of

David Mitchell 大卫·米切尔
Pres. 2006 .
主席 2006 .
K.
Kafer. Feminist, Queer, Crip, 8-10,
Kafer。女权主义者，酷儿，残疾人，8-10，
Feminist disability scholars have shown that the liberal project of disability elimination was pervasive in twentieth-century culture. This project had more overt maniestat the foil of the productive citizen, ing. but also circulated through the logics of devalued dependency, the foil 120, no. 2 (2005): 522-7; See Rosemarie Garland-Thomson, Martha Fineman, The Autonomy Mythi: A Theory of Depende
女权主义残疾学者已经表明，残疾消除的自由主义项目在二十世纪的文化中普遍存在。这个项目更明显地表现为生产性公民的对立面，但也通过贬值依赖的逻辑传播，参见 Rosemarie Garland-Thomson，Martha Fineman，《自主神话：一个依赖理论》
  1. Sandahl, "Queering the Crip or Cripping the (we the 29. Jay Dolmage, "Mapping Composition, in Disalim (B.ston. Bedford/St. Martin's, 2006), 14-27. Brenda Brueggeman and Cindy Eewiecki-Wison (Bostostice" Lewiuse Evideme, February 12, 2012,
    Sandahl，“异装残疾人或残疾人（我们 29. Jay Dolmage，“作文映射，在 Disalim（B.ston. Bedford/St. Martin's，2006），14-27。Brenda Brueggeman 和 Cindy Eewiecki-Wison（Bostostice” Lewiuse Evideme，2012 年 2 月 12 日，
  2. Mia Mingus, "Changing the Framework. hitps://leavingevidence,wordpress.coln/
    Mia Mingus，“改变框架。hitps://leavingevidence,wordpress.coln/

31. Kelly Fritsch, "Accessible," in Keyworts.jor
31. 凯利·弗里奇，“可访问性”，见《关键词典》
historical materialist and political economic traditions of the Ibid., 25. Access studies emerged from the historical Much of this work was deyoted to making a case social model, particularly in British disabily for access. Critical access studies does not disppace the fssudies). A few texts and projects that I consider the discourses surrounding access (S.e., inglude Rob Imric and Peter Hall, Indusive Desiyn: Designing and to be central to critical aceess studies iow Yotk: Spon Press, 2001), 14-18; Rob Imric, "Universalism, Developimg Accessible Eaviromments ANews Built Enviromment," Disatbility and Rechabilituttion 34, no, Universal Design and Equitabe "Issniversil Design a Critical Theory?" in Desimuing a More Inclusite T0 (2012): 8 S-2, Nes World, ed. S. Keates T isability (Cambrigge, MA. Dis/Ability und Desiming for Everyilyy Life (London: Routledge, 2014)
历史唯物主义和政治经济传统的同上，25 页。凯利·弗里奇，“可访问性”，见《关键词典》。凯利·弗里奇，“可访问性”，见《关键词典》。凯利·弗里奇，“可访问性”，见《关键词典》。凯利·弗里奇，“可访问性”，见《关键词典》。凯利·弗里奇，“可访问性”，见《关键词典》。

T. Titchkosky, Mad itt School: Rlictorics of Metmal Desimn: Places to Start," Disstbility Studies Quarterly 35, no. 2 (2015) 2011): Jay Dolmage, "Universal Design. Kemi Yergeau, Elizabech Brewer, Stephanie Kershbaum, Sushil hetp://dsq-sds,org/isste/viewtiased Michacl Salvo, and Franny Howes, Multimoddality in Motion: Dis-

Rehaldilitattion 36, no. 16 (2014): 1344- 99; Elizabethesicessors, 2016).
Polifics of Purticipation (New York. New York Studies: A Modest Proposal," in The Disibilitity Studies Reader, 33. Chris Bell, "Introducing White Disability Routledge, 2006), 275. The generative contributions of Black disability studies to the field, though often unrecognized, should not be discounted. See Chris Bell, disability studies to tie tield, though ofen disal
246 Ainii Hamraie
University Press, 2011); Jane Dunham, Jerome Harris, Shancia Jarrett, Leroy Moore, Akemi Nishid Margiret Price, Britney Robinson, and Sami Schalk, "Developing and Reflecting on a Black Disshidi, Studies Pedagogy: Work from the National Black Disability Coalition," Disibilitity Studies Quisterfy 35) no. 2 (2015), www.dscy-sds.org/article/view/4637/3933.
大学出版社，2011 年）；简·邓纳姆，杰罗姆·哈里斯，珊西亚·贾瑞特，勒罗伊·摩尔，秋美·西迪·玛吉瑞特·普莱斯，布兰妮·罗宾逊和萨米·沙尔克，“发展和反思黑人残疾研究教育学：来自国家黑人残疾联盟的工作”，《残疾研究季刊》35 卷 2 期（2015 年），www.dscy-sds.org/article/view/4637/3933。

Andreca Mihalache, "Architectural Handbooks and the User Experience" 101-12; Paul Emmmons and History of Anthitecture, ed. Kemny Cuppers (New York: Routledge, 2013), 35-50; Kemny Cupers, The Social Project (Mimeapolis: University of Mimnesota Press, 2014). In science and technology stur the see Murphy, Sick Buif/fing Symdrome; Ruth Schwartz. Cowan, "Consumption Junction: A Propesal fses, Research Strategies in the Sociology of Technology," in The Social Construction of Terthological Syas for
安德烈卡·米哈拉凯，“建筑手册与用户体验”101-12；保罗·艾蒙斯和建筑史，编。肯尼·卡珀斯（纽约：Routledge，2013 年），35-50；肯尼·卡珀斯，《社会项目》（明尼阿波利斯：明尼苏达大学出版社，2014 年）。在科学技术领域，参见墨菲，疾病建筑综合症；鲁思·施瓦茨·考恩，“消费结合点：技术社会学研究策略提案”，收录于《技术社会学的社会建构》中。

Trevor Pinch (Cambridge. MA: MIT Press, 1987); Nelly Oudshoorn and Trevor Pinch. eds. How, Hes Matter: The Co-Construction of Users ind Tectmologies, Inside Tecthwology (Cambridge, MA. MIT Press
Trevor Pinch（剑桥。麻省：麻省理工学院出版社，1987 年）；Nelly Oudshoorn 和 Trevor Pinch。编。如何，他的物质：用户和技术的共同建构，技术内部（麻省剑桥，麻省理工学院出版社）
  1. Susan M. Schweik, The Ulply Lans: Disdtility in Pullic (New York: New York University Press, 2010),
    Susan M. Schweik，供应链：公共领域中的残疾（纽约：纽约大学出版社，2010 年）
  2. Anna Carden-Coyne, Regustrusties the Anna Carden-Coyne, Reconstrulting the Bolly: Classitism, Modermism, and the First World War (Oxford
    Anna Carden-Coyne，登记安娜卡登科恩，重建身体：古典主义，现代主义和第一次世界大战（牛津

I aprop (Chicago. University of Clicago Press, 2011),
我的残疾（芝加哥：芝加哥大学出版社，2011 年）

Hulffuty (Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2007)
胡尔弗蒂（杜克大学出版社，2007 年）

18 Whose Disability (Studies)?
18 谁的残疾（研究）？

Defetishizing Disablement of the Iranian Survivors of the Iran-Iraq War
伊朗伊拉克战争幸存者的残疾去神话化

Sona Kazemi

Summary 摘要

This chapter examines processes of disablement in the global south, namely Iran and Iraqi This chapter wy wars launched and nurtured by both the local nation-states in the Middle East Kurdistan, by whom wite Europe. The veterans as well as the global north-the experiences, including poverty, unemployment, inadequate narratives expose their postwar experiences, US-imposed economic sanctions, and the presmedical-care, lack of disability-measurement system employed by the Iranian state. As a survivor of this war, Sona Kazemi invites the reader to bear witness to how the violence of sumerialism and mationalism not only renders people disabled, but also fetishizes their disablement by masking/mystifying the socio-political and economic relations that mediate the wiolent processes that render people disabled. By focusing on the veterans' actual living condivions. Kazemi seeks to defetishize disablement, shifting the narrative of disabled veterans and civilians from tales of terrorism, heroism, living martyrdom, and patriotism, toward recognition of disability of/in human beings in need of care and support.
本章探讨了全球南方（即伊朗和伊拉克）的残疾化过程。本章分析了中东库尔德斯坦地区的当地国家发动和培育的战争，以及欧洲的介入。退伍军人以及全球北方的经历，包括贫困、失业、不足的叙述揭示了他们战后的经历，美国强加的经济制裁，以及伊朗政府采用的缺乏残疾测量系统。作为这场战争的幸存者，索娜·卡泽米邀请读者见证了苏美尔主义和民族主义的暴力不仅使人残疾，而且通过掩盖/神秘化中介人们残疾的暴力过程的社会政治和经济关系，使他们的残疾成为一种异化。卡泽米通过关注退伍军人的实际生活条件，试图去异化残疾化，将残疾退伍军人和平民的叙述从恐怖主义、英雄主义、活着的殉道和爱国主义的故事转向对需要关怀和支持的人类的残疾/残疾的认可。
The world's military spending was over billion in 2016 , equivalent to 2.2 percent of he global gross domestic product (GDP), or per person (Tian, Fleurant, Wezeman, & Wezeman, 2017). Landmines and random explosions result in the largest number of disWezilites caused by wars and armed conflicts. Every month, at least 2,000 people are killed, ind countries around the world (United Nations, 2007).
2016 年，全球军事支出超过 亿美元，相当于全球国内生产总值（GDP）的 2.2％，或每人 美元（Tian，Fleurant，Wezeman 和 Wezeman，2017 年）。地雷和随机爆炸导致了由战争和武装冲突引起的最多的伤残。每个月，至少有 2,000 人在世界各国被杀害（联合国，2007 年）。
The disable nation we can expect from peripheral and disappearing regions (e.g., the Middle East) (Erevelles, 2011; Gorman, 2016; Meekosha, 2011; Kazemi, 2017). Erevelles (2011) defines fetishization of disability as the process/es by which the socio-political relations and/or ecoretishization of somehow mystinomic agendas behind the production of dive how the disablement of global southem bodies fied/masked/naturalized/justified. I analyze how the disalmement of global southern bodies in imperialist and nationalist wars are persistently "naturalized"-that is, attributed to the natural state of affairs in those regions, with the inevitable consequence that they cannot be arme the violence of ongoing imperialism (Erevelles, 2011; Gorman, 2016; Kazemi, 2017; Meekosha, 2011)
我们可以期待从外围和消失地区（例如中东）（Erevelles，2011 年；Gorman，2016 年；Meekosha，2011 年；Kazemi，2017 年）获得的残疾国家。 Erevelles（2011 年）将残疾的物化定义为社会政治关系和/或生产多样性背后的生态政治议程的过程/过程，以及全球南部身体的残疾化如何被物化/掩盖/自然化/合理化。我分析了在帝国主义和民族主义战争中全球南部身体的残疾化是如何持续“自然化”的-即，被归因于这些地区事务的自然状态，其不可避免的后果是他们无法抵御持续帝国主义的暴力（Erevelles，2011 年；Gorman，2016 年；Kazemi，2017 年；Meekosha，2011 年）。
Drawing on Razack's ( 2011 , p. 1) conceptualization of "those who are already dead to us," I suggest being from the global-south or from the "third world" is also often viewed as a disabling "condition." Indeed, the most progressive of inquiries - those that acknowledge injury to "third world" people-insist on a direct parallel between "backwardness" and disability. Not surprisingly the "natural body" that is made possible by viewing disability as a flawed
借鉴 Razack（2011 年，第 1 页）对“那些对我们已经死去的人”的概念，我认为来自全球南方或“第三世界”也经常被视为一种致残的“状态”。事实上，最具进步性的调查——那些承认对“第三世界”人民的伤害的调查——坚持认为“落后”与残疾之间存在直接的平行关系。毫不奇怪，将残疾视为一种有缺陷的“自然身体”变得可能。