研究ノート：フェミニスト障害学の視点からみる相互信頼、身体肯定、自己肯定 133

Research notes : Interdependence, Body Empowerment and Self-Esteem
From a Feminist (Dis) ability Perspective

Interdependence, Body Empowerment and Self-Esteem
From a Feminist (Dis) ability Perspective
Juliana Buriticá ALZATE
Introduction
Feelings of isolation, loneliness and personal insecurity are closely
related to contemporary ideas of success and myths of independence andself-sufficiency. It is also common to find evidence of both menʼs andwomenʼs dissatisfaction with their bodies or with who they are. How can
we replace these feelings with a sense of togetherness and empowerment?
Through an account of diﬀerent representations of bodies and exploring
the myriad of ways people can feel about their own bodies, this paper
oﬀers a possible path to embrace our bodily existence and its connection
to self-esteem. The experiences of shame and pride are not mutually
exclusive, instead they “dance, spar, sit at the same table” (Clare, 2012, pp.
461-462). Therefore, an openness to the nuances between shame andpride, and between. body hatred and body love, is required.
This paper explores the theme of interdependence in connection tobody empowerment and self- esteem from a feminist disability
perspective.1 Instead of defining interdependence univocally, this paper
takes in its multiple meanings within feminist disability scholarship.
Feminists and scholars of gender, sexuality and disability have studiedinterdependence and caring from diﬀerent angles. On the one hand, they
offer critical views on dependency and independency issues, or
problematize how caring for others has been considered an integral part ofthe social role of women, or stress the importance of including an ethics ofcare in conversations about social justice (Taylor, 2014, p.109). On the other
hand, disability scholars have studied what it means to be cared for, howthat care often becomes another form of oppression, and the importanceof building an inclusive and accessible society (p.109). Feminism, gender,

134

sexuality and disability intersect, overlap and inform each other in several
ways (McRuer, 2003, p.97). Therefore, when adopting a feminist disability
perspective a particular view of interdependence and new possibilities forbody empowerment and self-esteem emerge.
As an able-bodied researcher, I am confronted with the question ofentitlement and what authority I have to write about the experience ofdisabled bodies from an outsiderʼs point of view. In order to learn about
disability and raise awareness of the multiple ways a feminist disability
perspective enriches studies of embodiment and self-esteem, there is aneed to listen to and engage directly with stories about living withdisability and academic accounts on disability. Just as feminism, queer
activism and a larger civil rights movement need all kinds of allies, disability
scholarship and activism is certainly open to able-bodied allies. That being
said, this paper takes interest in the experiences of physically disabledbodies, and argues that a feminist approach allows us to understand that
we are all interdependent, and that this recognition can contribute topositively inform our body image and self-esteem.
Henrietta L. Mooreʼs notion of “ethical imagination” is significant to thispaperʼs approach. In her words, ethical imagination refers to “the forms andmeans through which individuals imagine relationships to themselves andothers… the way in which technologies of the self, forms of subjectificationand imagined relations with others lead to novel ways of approachingsocial transformation” (Moore, 2011, p.291). Basically, it is the recognition of
the fact that we share this world with others, with all different kinds ofothers, who live a diﬀerently embodied life; and our awareness of others,
and being diﬀerent from them, is indispensable to our own sense of self.2
In fact, according to Butler (2004), “my very formation implicates the otherin me … my own foreignness to myself is, paradoxically, the source of myethical connection with others” (p.46). Moreover, there is a fundamental
dependency on anonymous others; that is, there are people I do not know

研究ノート：フェミニスト障害学の視点からみる相互信頼、身体肯定、自己肯定 135

Research notes : Interdependence, Body Empowerment and Self-Esteem
From a Feminist (Dis) ability Perspective

or/and will never know on whom my life depends (p.xii). Hence, even when
there is an issue that aﬀects others and does not aﬀect us directly, we havethe capacity to engage with this issue, to put oneself in anotherʼs shoes,
and connect with and learn from their experiences.
Society is not composed of two split groups; with self-sufficient,
individual, able-bodied subjects on the one hand, and marginal,
dependent, disabled subjects on the other. We are all dependent on eachother, or rather, we are all interdependent ( Taylor, 2014, p.111).
Dependency is a basic human condition: “ human beings begin life
dependent on others and most of us will end life dependent on others”(p.112). In other words, “the body is itself ̶ whatever else it is ̶ a site ofdependency. None of us come to the world independently” (Butler in
Taylor, 2009, p. 210). Thinking about interdependence involves challenging
the fiction of independence by simply acknowledging that “no one escapes
dependency in a lifetime ” and that “ interdependence begins withdependence” (Kittay, 1998, pp.xii-xiii).
Sunaura Taylor ̶ artist, writer and activist whose research areas include
animal rights and disability ̶ points out that disabled people have beenlabeled as dependent and stigmatized as burdensome (Taylor, 2014).
Moreover, able-bodied people often pose as if they have overcome thisbasic dependency and live in a delusion of independence (Taylor, 2014;
Taylor, 2009). These ideas of self-suﬃciency and independence are a kindof social myth that aﬀects the image of disabled people. They are perceived
as more dependent, when in reality “we are all interdependent, that is,dependent on diﬀerent structures and on each other” (Taylor, 2009, p.187).
As Taylor (2014) emphasizes, the main issue here “is not that able-bodied
people and disabled people are equally dependent, but rather that thedichotomy between independence and dependence is a false one” (p.113).
Dependency is a real part of being alive in this world but manifests itself invarying degrees. An alternative to the dichotomy between independence

136

and dependence is interdependence. In fact, “ the whole planet isinterdependent” (p.113). The notion of interdependence will be further
explored in three main sections about: 1) mending the gap between bodyand self and intersubjectivity, 2) reciprocity and care, and 3) body
empowerment and self-esteem through experience-based accounts ofdisability.
1 Body, Self and Intersubjectivity
Action is anchored to our bodies, yet it is via our bodies that we become
vulnerable to the actions of others. Butler (2004) stresses that “the skin andthe flesh expose us to the gaze of others, but also to touch, and to violence,and bodies put us at risk of becoming the agency and instrument of allthese as well” (p.26). In other words, the body implies vulnerability andagency, and it has both a material and personal dimension as well as a
discursive and social one. In this way, the body is partly created withinsocial life, which means that ̶ without us wanting to, or even being awareof it ̶ our bodies already connect us to others. To claim that the body isautonomous and independent is a denial of this social dimension, of this“primary and unwilled physical proximity to others” (p.26).

The idea that we possess a body is evidenced through the expression“my body,” which implies a division between our body and our mind or self.

The dualism between body and mind plays a cognitive role in figures ofspeech; however, the myth of the supremacy of the mind over oneʼs bodyhas been widely refuted.3 The lived experience of disability reshapes therelationship between body and self (Lindgren, 2004, p.148). For instance,“the notion of having a body implies that the self exercises control over andeven ownership of the body. Illness and disability reveal that the body has
a mind of its own” (Lindgren, 2004, p.152). Hence, the accounts of people
with disabilities do not at all solidify the idea of the self as stable andunified ̶ based on the mind/body dichotomy ̶ but rather support ideas

研究ノート：フェミニスト障害学の視点からみる相互信頼、身体肯定、自己肯定 137

Research notes : Interdependence, Body Empowerment and Self-Esteem
From a Feminist (Dis) ability Perspectiveof selfhood grounded in bodily experience (Lindgren, 2004, p.148).
This approach leads to incorporating diﬀerence and change into models
of subjectivity and identity. Feminism, studies of gender, sexuality(especially queer theory) and disability converge in conceiving identity as
being fluid, fractured and multiple. 4 Similarly to gender and sexuality,
disability also brings to light the dynamism of identity:
Disability is an identity category that anyone can enter at any time,
and we will all join it if we live long enough. As such, disability
reveals the essential dynamism of identity. Thus, disability attenuates
the cherished cultural belief that the body is the unchanging anchor
of identity. Moreover, it undermines our fantasies of stable, enduring
identities in ways that may illuminate the fluidity of all identity … The
body is dynamic, constantly interac tive with histor y andenvironment. We evolve into disability. (Garland-Thomson, 2004,
pp.267-268).
This insight blurs the boundaries between ability and disability, depicts
identity as contextual and historic, and brings together embodiment andour sense of self. The links between body and self are also displayed in thephrase “our bodies, ourselves,” which was originally a slogan inspired by
the womenʼs health movement in the 1960s and ʻ70s in the United Statesthat spread globally.5 It fosters the recognition of the intimate connection
between body, mind, self and subject:
However alienated male-dominated culture makes us from ourbodies, however much it gives us instruments of self-hatred andoppression, still our bodies are ourselves. We move and act in thisflesh and these sinews and live our pleasures and pains in ourbodies. If we love ourselves at all, we love our bodies. (Young, 2005,

138

p.80)
Here Young (2005) asserts the connection between the social and personal
dimensions of the body, as well as the vulnerability and agency entailed inour bodily existence. From this passage we can also infer that theconnection between loving our bodies and loving ourselves can translate
into a connection between body empowerment and self-esteem. When we
understand our existence as “embodied selves” we can grasp how our body
image aﬀects our self-esteem and vice versa.
Reiterating the social dimension of the embodied-self, a subject is always
caught up in relationships with other subjects. Following Butlerʼs (1990)
postulates regarding gender, no one gets to have a gender on their own.
We need recognition for oneʼs gender identification, which in turn, requires
a supporting response from the surrounding context (Taylor. 2009, p.208).
Similarly, nobody (or no body) gets to understand their own place in thesocial order without the recognition of others, hence the importance ofaddressing the notion of intersubjectivity.
Intersubjectivity evokes “a performance and its reception, the originationof an idea and its recognition. Because of the indeterminacy of the bodyand its variable relation to gender, gender is an interdependent
phenomenon” (Abrams, 2011, p.78). This suggests a connection between
intersubjectivity and interdependence, and how both phenomena shape
our subjectivity and identity (Butler, 1990; 2004). For instance, gender,
sexuality and disability are constructed through intersubjective andinterdependent relationships and shape our subjectivity and sense ofidentity. Therefore, the processes towards body empowerment and selfesteem can also be thought of as interdependent, intersubjective and witha direct impact on our identity and subjectivity. We are all entangled ininterdependent relationships with others and the environments thatsurround us; which require a positive take on dependency, vulnerability

研究ノート：フェミニスト障害学の視点からみる相互信頼、身体肯定、自己肯定 139

Research notes : Interdependence, Body Empowerment and Self-Esteem
From a Feminist (Dis) ability Perspective

and agency.
2 Reciprocity and Care
Intersubjectivity not only entails interdependent relationships but also
subject-subject relations. The main issue here is how we can recognize theother as someone “with whom it is possible to have a dialogue based on
mutual recognition ” (Moore, 2007, p.72). This subject-subject model
requires recognizing others as both “like” and “other than” me; thus, it
incorporates ideas of equality and diﬀerence.
Following Nussbaum (2001), a model that conceives citizens as “roughequals,” who cooperate with each other only through supply-and-demand
relationships, needs to be revised because it “ effaces the more
asymmetrical forms of dependency that human life contains: the need forcare in infancy, extreme age, and periods of severe illness or a lifetime ofsevere disability” (B9). There is a need to create a new model in which theneeds of the cared for are met with dignity, without exploiting theproviders of care (who are largely women ̶ putting the equality of womenat stake) (B9). In other words, “instead of picturing one another as roughequals making a bargain, we may be better oﬀ thinking of one another as
people with varying degrees of capacity and disability, in a variety ofdifferent relationships of interdependency with one another ” (B9). This
position is also supported by Kittay (1998) who proposes the developmentof “an equality wherein the condition of its possibility is the inevitability ofhuman interdependence: the interdependence which is featured bothliterally and metaphorically in the aphorism that we are all some motherʼschild” (p.50). The notion of interdependence needs an extended notion ofreciprocity that recognizes relations of nested dependencies, and theethics behind the colloquial phrase “what comes round comes round”; sothat “if someone helps another in her need, someone, in turn, will help thehelper when she is needy” (p.107).

140

Taking this into account, reciprocity does not necessarily mean equality
but rather mutual dependency. A feminist disability perspectiveemphasizes the need for mutual care as well as an awareness of theasymmetries of care relations between givers and receivers of care.
However, this type of reciprocity is threatened by ideas of independence
that feed notions of inequality within these relationships. For example,
inequality emerges when there are cases of economic dependence,
helplessness and subordination (Morris, 1991; Wendell, 2004). In this case,when we prize individualistic autonomy and independence, we fail tonotice that we all need care and assistance to live (Garland-Thomson, 2004,
p.268).
Interdependence implies dependence. However, the word “dependence”
has both negative and positive meanings; it can be associated withhelplessness and subordination, or with reliability and trust (p.268). In
order to have a positive view on interdependence we must overcome thenegative connotations of dependence and embrace its positive aspects;
that is, to move closer to a model of reciprocity and mutual trust.
One of the effects of negatively judging dependency, or preferring
independence over dependence, is that asking for help becomes a sign ofweakness ( Taylor, 2009, p.196). Therefore, help is associated withembarrassment and insufficiency (p.196). As Wendell (2006) writes,“dependence on the help of others is humiliating in a society which prizes

independence” (p.252). Yet, whether disabled or nondisabled, everybody
needs help. In this context, the very act of asking for and providing help or
assistance is already a way of challenging the type of individualism that isbased upon an ideal of independence.
In addition, there are particular groups of people who need constanthelp from others to survive, and as long as independence is considered astrength and a necessary condition for respect and self-esteem, thesegroups are doomed to be devalued (p.252). Consequently, when people

研究ノート：フェミニスト障害学の視点からみる相互信頼、身体肯定、自己肯定 141

Research notes : Interdependence, Body Empowerment and Self-Esteem
From a Feminist (Dis) ability Perspective

living with disabilities see the possibility of living independently (as anyother able-bodied person is pretending to) they will likely pursue it. In away, the pressure and oppression attached to the ideal of independence
can be diminished if we embraced dependence instead. In other words,“acceptance of dependency may fit the needs of some much better than

the struggle against it” (Miller & Gwynne, 1972, p.88, quoted in Morris,
1991, p.131).
Embracing our mutual dependencies points to simultaneously “caring”
and being “cared for,” to both asking for and providing help. According to
Wendell (2006), women who became disabled as adults experience atransformation from being “carers” (taking physical care of others, often
husbands and children) to being “cared for” (p.252). Wendell (2006) also
points out that when looking at the stories of recently disabled adultwomen, it is possible to identify their struggle with shame and loss of selfesteem, which suggests that there is indeed a cultural correlation between
independence, pride and self-esteem (p.252). 6 It is thus pertinent toquestion individualistic discourses that entrench normative prejudicesrelated to ability, sexuality and embodiment.
Eli Clare (2012) ̶ poet, essayist and speaker about disability, queer andtrans identities, and social justice ̶ explains how this theme belongs to abroader discussion about gender roles and disability:
To be female and disabled is to be seen as not quite a woman; to bemale and disabled is to be seen as not quite a man. The mannerisms
that help define gender ̶ the ways in which people walk, swing
their hips, gesture with their hands, move their mouths and eyes as
they talk, take up space with their bodies ̶ are all based upon how
nondisabled people move … The construction of gender depends
not only upon the male body and the female body but also upon thenondisabled body. (Clare, 1999, p.112)

142

The intimate relationship between gender identity and ability often leads
to misconceiving disabled people as genderless, or less female or less male,and by extension, sexless (p.112). However, gender categories arefabrications that rely on heterosexual and able-bodied assumptions (Butler,
1990). To be aware of how ideals regarding gender, ability andindependence are interrelated and socioculturally constructed, is anecessary step towards moving away from trying to fit these impossible
ideals, but rather accept and affirm gender, sexual and bodily diversity
together with interdependence.
“To be caring” has been considered a quality generally assigned to (able-bodied) women. Yet, we all need to be caring and cared for in multiple
ways throughout our lives. In this way, “care and needing care are sites thatrather than trying to avoid, we need to be radically attentive to” (Taylor,2014, p. 124). Interdependence and reciprocity are ways of paying attention
to care and the need for it.
Wendell (2006) points out that women with disabilities often interact
with their care-givers through models of reciprocity (p.252). Reciprocity is
an attempt to recognize each otherʼs needs and build relationships inwhich we can rely on each other, ask for, receive and provide help, cultivate
feelings of empathy and trust and respect each otherʼs boundaries (p.252).
This model of reciprocity is a concrete example of how a positive view oninterdependence and an abandonment of our cultural obsession withindependence and gender roles can benefit all of us.
3 Body Empowerment and Self-Esteem
Disability is often regarded as a private matter, a personal or family issue,
rather than a matter of social responsibility (Wendell, 2006, p. 246).
However, from a feminist disability perspective, the well-known expression“the personal is political” can be extended into the notion that disability issocially constructed. This posture aligns with the so-called social model of

研究ノート：フェミニスト障害学の視点からみる相互信頼、身体肯定、自己肯定 143

Research notes : Interdependence, Body Empowerment and Self-Esteem
From a Feminist (Dis) ability Perspective

disability, which “views the restrictions in the lives of disabled people as aresult of environmental, behavioral and institutional structures in society”(Inahara, 2009, p.9).7 This model claims that people are being disabled not
only by their bodily conditions or medical diagnoses, but also by society
itself. Therefore, disability is not only an individual or personal issue but
also a social and political one.
Experiences of disability are available to us through literature ̶ fictional,
nonfictional and academic. It is through authors with disability and theiraccount of their bodily experience that we can access their personal andsocial realities and reflect about them as well. This section looks at diﬀerent
accounts from four disabled authors (Inahara Minae, Ototake Hirotada, Eli
Clare and Sunaura Taylor) through the lenses of interdependence, body
empowerment and self-esteem.
Firstly, we will look at Inahara Minaeʼs story ̶ professor and researcher
on feminist psychoanalysis, disability theory and philosophy of the body.
For Inahara (2009) the search of an image of physical disability that she canidentify with is crucial: “an image that does not suggest pity or misfortune,
but one that reflects the complexity, fluidity, multiplicity, and vulnerabilityof all modes of embodiment ” (p.3). This suggests that rather thanconsidering disability ̶ or any other mode of embodiment ̶ negatively,
we must recognize that all bodily life brings in vulnerability, change anddiversity.
As previously mentioned, we share this world with all kinds of others, sointersubjectivity/inter-corporeality is a main aspect of our bodily life.
Inahara (2009) embraces intersubjectivity and interdependence in terms oflove and connection: “ love becomes an expansive feeling for theconnection to others that is vital to all of us” (p.164). In fact, she proposesthat our images of embodiment are deeply related to connection and love:
Love operates to connect others together. Love is, to me, crucial in

144the experience of othering the self and in the process of undoingthat otherness. Thus, the process of undoing this otherness is toreturn the self-love; this functions to encourage us to accept the“Other.” I love my body with a nostalgia for the pre-symbolic stage,

when my body was not distinguished as the disabled “Other.” I keep
loving my body rather than forcing myself to distinguish it as the“Other” ̶ the lack of able-bodiedness. (p.163)

This is the conclusion of Inaharaʼs last chapter in her book, Abject Love, inwhich she explores the shift from self-denial to self-acceptance of her own
physical disability through an account of the movie E.T The Extra Terrestrial,
while also addressing Julia Kristevaʼs (1982) theory of abjection and hernotion of being a stranger to oneself (Inahara, 2009, pp.133-134).8 Inahara
accounts the process of re-signifying the “Other” through returning to selflove at the moment where society and language had not yet turned her
into the “ Other. ” Inahara (2009) undergoes a process of expelling
everything that is not the subject, expelling the negativity and embracing
the fluidity ̶ the changing nature ̶ of her body (p.134). She is following
personally and theoretically Kristeva ʼ s (1982) ideas on abjection andsubjectivity: “I expel myself, I spit myself out, I abject myself within thesame motion through which “I” claim to establish myself” (p.3). Hence,
abjection is necessary to the formation of the subject. The impact ofKristevaʼs theory in Inaharaʼs process of achieving self-esteem is containedin the following statement:
Without imaginary abjection, the image of E.T. would have left mewith a negative image of physical otherness. When I watched thisfilm, I reconstituted the images of both E.T. and myself as “lovable”
and acceptable, and I started loving my embodied self . (Inahara,
2009, p.159)

研究ノート：フェミニスト障害学の視点からみる相互信頼、身体肯定、自己肯定 145

Research notes : Interdependence, Body Empowerment and Self-Esteem
From a Feminist (Dis) ability Perspective

This passage shows how Inahara managed to see otherness within herself
and develop a positive image of physical otherness in order to love andaccept her embodied self. The process of loving our bodies, accepting
ourselves and developing self-esteem is diﬃcult. There are two reasons ̶
the first being the need to go through a process of re-signifying otherness
and diﬀerence, and the second having to face the pressure imposed by theideal of the able-bodied independent subject. Along these lines, in aninterview for the Japan Times, Inahara observes that:
Thinking about disability equals contemplating ability. It questions
human existence. “ Be normal! ” we are told. But what does thatmean? We have to free ourselves from the archetypes of what ahuman being is. I want to share my perspective that every disabled
and every abled person has a different view on life. All are worth
looking at and all are beautiful. (Kawaguchi, 2012, para. 3)This insight also brings together disability and ability, and serves as aninvitation to recognize and celebrate body diversity. This may result in the
proliferation of alternative visions of beauty and the deconstruction of
normalcy. The very notions of a normal and ideal body are hereinchallenged.
Next, we will look at Ototake Hirotadaʼs story ̶ he is a sports journalist, a
primary school teacher, and has published several books about his own
experience that are widely read in Japan. In Ototake ʼ s autobiography

Gotaifumanzoku 五体不満足 No One’s Perfect (1998/2003), we find clues on

how interdependence is a key element in developing body empowerment
and self-esteem. It is a narrative about acceptance, on personal and societal
levels, and it is also a tale about care and interdependence. For Ototake(1998/2003), the support of his family, friends and teachers was very
important to his development and self-esteem. He learned the importance146

of interdependence and assistance at a very early age. In his own words:
In todayʼs competitive society where one is always expected to excel,
we ʼ re losing sight of what ʼ s obvious ̶ when you see someone
having trouble, you lend a hand. Weʼve been hearing for a long time
now about the breakdown of communities whose members used tohelp one another. It could be that the people who come to therescue, the people who can rebuild a more fully human society, will
be people with disabilities. (Ototake, 1998/2003, p.81)
Ototake (1998/2003) puts forward a model of interdependence andreciprocity, of “doing something for other people, for society. Living in acaring way. Understanding and being understood by as many people aspossible” (p.169). In other words, we could say that both assistance andcare are at the heart of all human connectivity, which can be understood as
a fundamentally human feature: “connection is why we are here. Itʼs whatgives purpose and meaning to our lives” (Brown, 2010).
Body empowerment and self-esteem boil down to having a deep senseof worthiness ̶ being worthy of love, belonging and connection ̶ tobeing able to say, without hesitation: “Iʼm good enough” (Brown, 2010).
This is needed to strengthen human relations and put in practiceinterdependence with reciprocity. Ototakeʼs story exemplifies this feelingof “being enough,” of loving oneself in a fully comprehensive way. An
example of positive reaﬃrmation in his life is the way he appreciates thescars on his back due to several operations he underwent when he was
growing up. His physical scars are not a source of shame or disgust, butrather, of pride. As he himself said, they became his medals: “V” for victory(Ototake, 1998/2003, p.54). Clearly, he incorporates all of his physical traits
into a positive discourse of himself. Ototake (2013) declares that, “I am by
no means a perfect person. Even so, I like myself. Everything about me,

研究ノート：フェミニスト障害学の視点からみる相互信頼、身体肯定、自己肯定 147

Research notes : Interdependence, Body Empowerment and Self-Esteem
From a Feminist (Dis) ability Perspective

including all my incompetence, my faults, my weaknesses and the fact that
I donʼt have arms or legs; I am Ototake Hirotada, and Iʼm a lovely person”(p.238).9 In this process of loving himself, Ototake also thanks all of those
who helped him, in particular, his parents. He extends his sense of
gratefulness by addressing, in general, parents who raised children who
can practice positive self-aﬃrmation (p.238).
We can also find the importance of connection, interdependence andpride in Eli Clareʼs story ̶ previously introduced as a poet and writer on
disability and queer issues. Clare (1999) points out that “queer and cripple
are cousins: words to shock, words to infuse with pride and self-love, words
to resist internalized hatred, words to help forge politics. They have been
gladly chosen ̶ queer by many gay, lesbian, bi, and trans peoples, cripple
or crip, by many disabled people” (p.84). Accordingly, one path towards
empowerment is re-signifying language that has been used to reproduce
shame and oppression.
Clare (2012) also tackles the ways in which shame inhabits our bodies
and how to resist its habitation. According to Clare (2012) “shame lives in
the mirror and the camera, and its impact is huge, ranging from low selfesteem to addiction, from infrequent healthcare to suicide” (p.456). Due toits impact, dealing with body shame is a priority, and one way of doing it isby making our bodies home (p.464). The process of re-signifying the body
into a positive experience requires personal commitment:
In the mirrors, I would see ugly, stupid, wrong. And I would say back,“Beautiful, strong, right”... Sometimes I would believe myself, othertimes not... Slowly one by one, I unpacked the lies that backed myshame. I sat in community. I pounded words out onto paper. I readdisability politics. I cannot say I am done; I doubt there is one definite
end to this struggle, one complete passage between shame andpride. (Clare, 2012, p. 463)

148

As we can elicit from this passage, making our bodies our home is aconstant challenge and dealing with shame, a daily eﬀort. Yet, it is throughinteracting and sharing his experience with others, reading and writingthat Clare (2012) manages to articulate his bodily experience and embrace
his embodied self. He also turns to interdependence and the importance ofbeing part of a supporting network of care in order to be able to build apositive body image. Addressing the providers of assistance, Clare (2012)
writes:We need services that are nonjudgmental, that partner with us as wework to make our bodies home, that grant us self-determination,that frame trans-ness not as a pathology but as a human variation,that give us resources and tools in resistance to shame. Sometimes
our lives depend on it. (p.463)
This passage highlights the importance of interacting with providers ofcare on a reciprocal level together with an appreciation of body andgender diversity. From this account we can learn that the task of making
our bodies home ̶ of accepting our bodies ̶ is both personal andpolitical; making it a matter of social responsibility. As Clare (2012) puts it:“if we are to make a sustaining community that profoundly challenges

shame, we need to acknowledge the collective and political implications
that trail our personal, individual decisions” (p.464).
This posture aligns with the task of thinking of body empowerment, selfesteem and connection in political terms. For Sunaura Taylor ̶ previously
introduced as an artist and scholar on disability and animal rights ̶ themoment when she went from body shaming to body acceptance waswhen she realized her issues were not only personal, but also involved
others around her, triggering a new connection within her. Taylor (2009)
remarks that:

研究ノート：フェミニスト障害学の視点からみる相互信頼、身体肯定、自己肯定 149

Research notes : Interdependence, Body Empowerment and Self-Esteem
From a Feminist (Dis) ability Perspective

I think all the feelings that I had grown up with ̶ that my body wasabnormal, that I was deformed, that it was a tragedy ̶ all these sortsof things that Iʼd really sort of internalized as being my own personal
problem suddenly blasted open and then I just realized how muchtheyʼre political and theyʼre civil rights issues, so it made me moredetermined to figure out a way of interacting physically with theworld. (in Taylor, 2009, p.196)
Stressing the theme of interdependence in political action, Taylor
highlights that disability is not personal, but social and we can identify theways in which empowerment is involved in that very recognition. We
cannot find solutions to problems of ability, disability and gendernormativity on our own (Butler in Taylor, 2009, p.209). There is a limit toindividualism because we are part of a social space, we need diﬀerent kindsof recognition and also, it is only in joint action with others that we canchange what is normative and ideal and what is not (p.209). Therefore,“underlying all this is the idea that we are interdependent as we try andattract certain social transformations that aﬀect us at very personal levels”(p.209).
For Taylor, art is a fundamental part of who she is, and has played asignificant role in her way of viewing and understanding both herself andthe world around her. Amongst Taylorʼs paintings, we find several selfportraits that articulate her disability, illustrate ways of building positive
body images, and link art to self-empowerment. In her own words, “mypaintings are not at all only about the body, but the body is inevitably an
aspect of my relationship with whatever it is that I am seeing ” (Taylor,2006). Taylorʼs works are not only personal and emotional portraits but also
political statements on war, ideas of normalcy, and issues of identity(Taylor, 2004). Hence, her art and exhibitions serve as a platform toactivism. Both Taylorʼs art and scholarship show consistently the links

150

between the personal, social and political.
Finally, Taylor (2014) goes straight to the point when she writes that“vulnerability and dependence can be unsettling as they are states that

require intimacy, empathy, and self-reflection, but they also hold thepotential for new ways of being, supporting and communicating ̶ newways of creating meaning across differences ” (p.124). Based on thisassertion, both vulnerability and dependence are key elements ofinterdependence, and once we embrace them we will be able to re-signify
our body image and self-esteem.
Conclusion
This paper explored the theme of interdependence while drawing on
personal and theoretical accounts from authors with/on disabilities.
Interdependence is a basic condition shared by all human beings, and it isa key term that dismantles the myths of independence and self-suﬃciency.
From a feminist disability perspective ̶ by bringing together aspects ofdisability studies and gender and sexuality studies including queer
theory ̶ we are encouraged to challenge ideals of normalcy and reexamine the notion of independence as a sign of liberation and a condition
to self-respect and self-esteem. Interdependence is featured as a way toapproach body empowerment and self-esteem. Coming to terms withinterdependence implies embracing our mutual dependencies,
vulnerabilities and adopting relationships of reciprocity and mutual care.
Through four stories of body empowerment and self-esteem, taken fromtestimonies by a few selected authors with disability on disability, we canunderstand that there is not just one magic formula to achieve body
empowerment and self-esteem; rather, these processes emphasize fluidity,
multiplicity and fragmentation.
The word “body empowerment” involves thinking of the body in termsof ability, in terms of the power of action, as a bundle of different

研究ノート：フェミニスト障害学の視点からみる相互信頼、身体肯定、自己肯定 151

Research notes : Interdependence, Body Empowerment and Self-Esteem
From a Feminist (Dis) ability Perspective

capacities. Also, the word “ self-esteem ” highlights the importance ofrespect of one ʼ s own body. It also indicates love, appreciation andgratefulness for being who we are.
We are all wired to be interdependent, to both give and receive, to ask
for and provide help, to mutually depend on each other. Yet,interdependence does not deny multiple modes of embodiment or
particular experiences; on the contrary, it aﬃrms fluidity and diversity. In
short, interdependence is about acknowledging that inherent vulnerability
and dependency, and how it connects us with each other.

152

Footnotes
1

Morris (1991), Wendell (2004) and Garland-Thomson (2004; 2005) have worked
extensively on feminist theorizing from a disability perspective. For more on
feminist disability studies see Silvers (2013). Also, feminist philosophers such as
Annette Baier (1987), Eva Kittay (1998), Martha Nussbaum (2001), and Iris Marion
Young (1990) have worked on theories of inclusion that have been bothinfluenced by and influential to disability studies. Their works address ethics oftrust, care, virtues of dependency and equality. Specifically, Baier and Nussbaum
address the theme of interdependency.

2

Intersectional identity has been theorized extensively within feminist scholarship(see Butler, 1990; Bordo, 1993; Clare, 1999; Smith, B.G. & Hutchison, B, 2004). On
the diﬀerence between identity and identification, see Butler, 1990.

3

For theories challenging the Cartesian mind-body split, particularly, the primacyof mind over body, see feminist philosophy and/or post-structuralist thought. For
example: Irigaray, 1985; Deleuze & Guattari, 2004; Grosz, 1994.

4

The fluidity of identity and subjectivity has been theorized within gender andsexuality studies, queer theory and disability studies. (See Grosz, 1994; Butler,
1990, Bordo, 1993; Garland-Thomson, 2004; Davis, 2006)

5

Our Bodies, Ourselves (OBOS) also known as the Boston Women's Health Book
Collective, is a non-for-profit organization promoting girls' and women's
reproductive health and sexuality. “Our Bodies, Ourselves ” is their landmark
publication and has been translated into 25 diﬀerent languages. The first edition
was published in 1970. This best-seller has also been translated into Japanese as
からだ・私たち自身 karada watashitachi jishin . OBOS coined and spread thisslogan globally for the body politics movement.
6This loss of self-esteem and experiences of shame are not exclusive to recently
disabled adult women, but also to adult men. For example, newly disabledathletes (either men or women) would find it particularly challenging to embrace
their new life with disability.

7

Within disability studies there is an important distinction between the medical
model of disability and the social model of disability, as well as between
impairment (biological) and disability (social). Inahara (2009) explains: “ the研究ノート：フェミニスト障害学の視点からみる相互信頼、身体肯定、自己肯定 153

Research notes : Interdependence, Body Empowerment and Self-Esteem
From a Feminist (Dis) ability Perspective

medical model finds the problem with disabled individuals rather than withsociety and it suggests that the way in which we solve the problem is to change
the disabled individual to fit into society, rather than improve social conditions toaccommodate the disabled individual” (p.8).
8

According to Kristeva (1982) what causes abjection is “what disturbs identity,system, order. What does not respect borders, positions, rules. The in-between,
the ambiguous, the composite ” (p.4). For more on theory of abjection see
Kristeva, 1982; Kristeva, 1991.

9The English is my own translation from the original text in Japanese:「僕は、けっして完璧な人間などではない。それでも、自分が好き。至らない自分、
欠点だらけの自分、弱い自分、手足のない自分―――そんなあれやこれやを全部ひっくるめて、僕は乙武洋匡という人間を、いとおしく思っている」(Ototake, 2013, p.

238).

154

References
Abrams, K. (2011). Performing interdependence: Judith Butler and Sunaura Taylor in
the Examined Life. Columbia Journal of Gender and Law, 21 (2), 72-90.
Baier, A. (1987). The need for more than justice. In M. Hanen & K. Neilson (Eds.),
Science, morality, and feminist theory. Canadian Journal of Philosophy, supp.
vol.13, 41-56.
Bordo, S. (1993). The unbearable weigh: feminism, western culture and the body .
Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.
Brown, B. (2010, June). The power of vulnerability [Video file]. Retrieved January 30,
2015, from https://www.ted.com/talks/brene_brown_on_vulnerability
Butler, J. (1990). Gender trouble: feminism and the subversion of Identity. London:
Routledge.
Butler, J. (2004). Precarious life: the powers of mourning and violence. New York: Verso.
Clare, E. (1999). Exile and pride: disability, queerness and liberation. Cambridge: SouthEnd Press Classics.
Clare, E. (2012). Resisting shame: making our bodies home. Seattle Journal for Social
Justice, 8 (2), 455-465.

Davis, L. (Ed.). (2006) The disability studies reader. New York: Taylor & Francis Group.
Deleuze, G. & Guattari, F. (2004). A thousand plateaus: capitalism and schizophrenia (B.
Massumi, Trans.) London: Continuum. (Original work published 1980).
Garland-Thomson, R. (2004). Integrating disability, transforming feminist theory. In
B.G. Smith & B. Hutchison (Eds.), Gendering disability. New Jersey: Rutgers
University Press.
Garland-Thomson, R. (2005). Feminist disability studies. Signs: Journal of Women in
Culture and Society, 30 (2), 1557-1587.

Grosz, E. (1994). Volatile bodies: toward a corporeal feminism. Bloomington: Indiana
University Press.
Inahara, M. (2009). Abject love: undoing the boundaries of physical disability. Lexington:
VDM Verlag Dr. Müller.
Irigaray, L. (1985). Speculum of the other woman (C.G.Gillian, Trans.). New York: Cornell
University. (Original work published 1974).
Kawaguchi, J. (2012, May 22). Minae Inahara, part-time lecturer at Rikkyo University.

研究ノート：フェミニスト障害学の視点からみる相互信頼、身体肯定、自己肯定 155

Research notes : Interdependence, Body Empowerment and Self-Esteem
From a Feminist (Dis) ability Perspective

The Japan Times. Retrieved January 30, 2015, from http://www.japantimes.

co.jp
Kittay, E. (1998). Love’s labor: essays on women, equality and dependency. New York:
Routledge.
Kristeva, J. (1982). Powers of horror: an essay on abjection (L.S. Roudiez, Trans.). New
York: Columbia University Press. (Original work published 1980).
Kristeva, J. (1991). Strangers to ourselves ( L.S. Roudiez, Trans.). New York: Columbia
University Press.
Lindgren, K. (2004). Bodies in trouble: identity, embodiment and disability. In B.G.
Smith & B. Hutchison (Eds.), Gendering disability . New Jersey: Rutgers
University Press.
McRuer, R. & Wilkerson, A.L. (Eds.). (2003). Desiring disability: queer theory meetsdisability studies. GLQ: A Journal of Lesbian and Gay Studies 9 (1-2).
Moore, H.L. (2007). The subject of anthropology: gender, symbolism and psychoanalysis.
Cambridge: Polity Press.
Moore, H.L. (2011). Still life: hopes, desires and satisfactions. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Morris, J. (1991). Pride against prejudice: transforming attitudes to disability, celebrate
the difference. London: The Womenʼs Press.

Nussbaum, M. (2001). The enduring significance of John Rawls. The chronicle of higher
education, Section 2, July 20: B7-B9.

Our Bodies Ourselves. (2005) Boston Womenʼs Health Book Collective, Inc. Retrieved
January 30, 2015, from http://www.ourbodiesourselves.org/
Ototake, H. (1998). Gotai fumanzoku. Tokyo: Kodansha.
Ototake, H. (2003). No one’s perfect (H. Gerry, Trans.). New York: Kodansha International.
(Original work published 1998).
Ototake, H. (2013). Jibun o aisuruchikara.Tokyo: Kodansha.
Silvers, A. (2013). Feminist perspectives on disability. In E.Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford
Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved January 29, 2015, from http://plato.

stanford.edu/archives/fall2013/entries/feminism-disability/
Smith, B.G. & Hutchison, B. (Eds.). (2004). Gendering disability. New Jersey: Rutgers
University Press.
Taylor, A. (Director). (2008). Examined life [Documentary]. United States: Zeitgeist

156

Films.
Taylor, A. (Ed). (2009). Judith Butler with Sunaura Taylor: interdependence. Examined
life: excursions with contemporary thinkers. New York: The New Press.

Taylor, S. (2006). Statement. Wynn Newhouse Awards. Retrieved January 30, 2015,
from http://www.wnewhouseawards.com/sunaurataylor.html
Taylor, S. (2014). Interdependent animals: a feminist disability ethic-of-care. In C.J.
Adams & L.Gruen (Eds.), Ecofeminism: feminist intersections with other animals
and the earth (pp.109-127). New York: Bloomsbury.

Young, I.M. (2005). On female body experience “throwing like a girl” and other essays.
New York: Oxford University Press.
Wendell, S. (2006). Toward a feminist theory of disability. In L. Davis (Ed.), Thedisability studies reader (pp.243-273). New York: Taylor & Francis Group.

研究ノート：フェミニスト障害学の視点からみる相互信頼、身体肯定、自己肯定 157

Research notes : Interdependence, Body Empowerment and Self-Esteem
From a Feminist (Dis) ability Perspective

フェミニスト障害学の視点からみる相互信頼、身体肯定、自己肯定
フリアナ・ブリティカ・アルサテ

この論文は、フェミニスト障害学を通して、身体肯定と自己肯定の関連における相互信頼（interdependence）の問題について論じる。著者は「倫理の想像力」の概念に目を向けつつ、障害のある身体の経験に対して関心を持っており、このアプローチが、身体を恥じることから身体を肯定することへの文化的態度の変化という提案して大きく寄与することを論じる。

相互依存に対する肯定的な視点は、身体についての肯定的なイメージと自己肯定のより高い感覚を明るみに出す。相互依存の概念は次の三つのセクションで論じる。第一のセクションでは、間主観性の概念について明らかにし、身体と自己の間に生じる断裂を修復することに焦点を当てる。第二のセクションでは互恵関係とケアの概念について論じ、自立という理想に挑む。第三のセクションでは、自らの身体を肯定することおよび自尊心の観念と照らし合わせ、

相互依存の概念について論じる。

相互依存は、障害者にも健常者にも影響を与えるもので、自立と自己充足の神話を解体する鍵となる語である。フェミニズムの障害学的視点からすると、
我々は自由のしるしとしての自立の概念について再検討することが推奨される。相互依存は、自らの身体を肯定することと自尊心に対する一つのアプロー
チとして考えられる。相互依存を受け入れることは自分の弱さを受け入れることである。

身体障害者の経験から得られる重要な教訓とは、自己受容、ケア、そして他者の受容という三者の関係性や、身体は決して単独で存在しないという事実を含んでいる。つまり、相互に信頼しあうこととは、我々が関わりあう主体としての他者のことを慮るよう我々に促すものである。他者と関わりあうという行
為は、団結と互恵モデルにとって決定的なものである。ゆえに、相互依存は
我々を身体肯定と自己肯定に近づける。

Keywords:
相互信頼、身体肯定、自己肯定、フェミニズム、障害