Abstract:

This article explores the problematic history of bringing together disability and animality, along with its potential. The aim is to introduce and develop the concept of disanimality, which is defined as “a disruptive affect, a feeling of discomfort, a site for critique, but also an opportunity for critical disability, animality, and human-animal studies to come together in more productive ways.” The underlying question is why these fields have had such a fraught relationship in the past, focusing, on the one hand, on why disability studies has often been reluctant to embrace animal advocacy, and, on the other hand, why certain forms of animal advocacy are less appealing, such as veganism and animal liberation. With examples from Don LePan’s dystopian novel, Animals, in which cognitively disabled human children are raised and slaughtered for food in a nightmarish near-future world, the article puts pressure on explicit comparisons between disabled people and animals. Rather than calling for veganism and liberation, the article pursues a posthumanist approach that allows not only for structural comparisons of biopolitical hierarchies, but also acknowledgments of fundamental differences between different forms of life, even as it disavows a singular binary opposition between “the human” and “the animal.”

摘要：

本文探讨了将残疾与动物融合在一起的历史问题及其潜力。目的是引入和发展不动物性的概念，该概念被定义为“破坏性影响，不适感，批评的场所，但同时也是严重残疾，动物性和人类动物研究的契机。更有效率的方式。” 潜在的问题是，为什么这些领域在过去有着如此繁琐的关系，一方面集中于为什么残疾研究经常不愿接受动物倡导，另一方面为何为什么某些形式的动物倡导素食主义和动物解放等吸引力较小。以唐·勒潘的反乌托邦小说《动物》为例该文章指出，在一个噩梦般的近距离世界中，有智力障碍的人类儿童会被饲养和宰杀作为食物，该文章对残疾人与动物之间的显式比较施加了压力。该文章不提倡素食主义和解放，而是奉行一种后人本主义的方法，该方法不仅允许对生物政治等级制度进行结构比较，而且可以承认不同生活形式之间的根本差异，即使它拒绝了“人类”之间的唯一二元对立。和“动物”。