Crippled Competition
What is Able-Normativity, and how do we combat it?

This is me as a toddler. It is hard to tell in this picture, but I struggled with basic mobility like crawling.
I vividly remember one day out of my seven-year gymnastics career while I was trying to do a handstand. It had taken years of falling on my head to finally learn to straighten my left arm a certain way to account for my muscular asymmetry. Even now, I tilt to the right when I do a handstand, and that day, my teammates were standing around me, snickering.
“Why can’t you do a handstand straight?” they said through giggles.
And there I was, on the brink of tears, not sure if I should ignore them or finally tell them that I have a rare disability that has caused me much emotional and physical pain.
At this point I am used to these types of ignorant comments, because I was born with Poland Syndrome, a condition that left me without strong ribs and my entire pectoralis major on my left side. As a toddler, I was too weak to even crawl, so my parents made sure I got involved in athletics at a young age in hope that I could keep up with the other kids. After a lot of falling on my head and probably a bit of brain damage, I eventually worked my way up to a handstand, and now I have made it to the point where I can bench press my body weight. However, the ableism hasn’t disappeared as I progressed. Athletics have created an environment where there is an assumption of an able body, and I am not the only person to suffer from this.

This is a comparison of a person without Poland Syndrome versus a person with Poland Syndrome. Notice how the person on the right image is missing their right pectoral muscle. https://www.plasticsurgeonnewportbeach.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/Poland-Syndrome-300×153.png
The unfortunate truth is that instances of able-normativity haven’t decreased as I aged, and it impacts any athlete with an abnormal body. From requiring disabled athletes to hide their impairments, to making unnecessary categorizations and assumptions that distance those with disabilities, ableism is seen in all aspects of athletics. As mentioned by Carla Silva, the common perception of “the able body as conditional to a life worth living” has a devastating impact on how disabled people interact with the athletic world and with their own physical state. The athletic world tends to rank a person’s accomplishments based on how well they can conform to the ideal, able body, but how does that impact people like me, who are physically incapable of achieving that, no matter how many miles we run or pushups we do?
The meaning of “normal”

This is one of the top pictures that come up when I Googled “ideal body.” While this is body positive, as it appreciates women of varying shapes, sizes, and ethnicities, it doesn’t include women with visual disabilities. bodies-1024×544.jpg
Since ableism is often overlooked, there isn’t uniform language used. Because of this, I will briefly explain the meaning and implications of the words I use.
- Normal body– the body you think of performing everyday tasks. This body is free of disabilities and is far too often the only body considered when making decisions about how sports should be governed.
- Ideal body– the standard that people with disabilities are held to. While in a regular context, ideal body that would fit societal standards of beauty, in terms of ableism, people with disabilities are often told that their goal should be to have an able, or normal, body. To many, this ideal body is unachievable.
- Able-Normativity– a term used to describe the intentional and unintentional tendency for people with irregular bodies to be overlooked in athletic contexts. A quick Google Image Search makes these ideas even more clear. While the pictures of the “ideal” body were more model-like than the normal body, none of the pictures showed a person with a visible disability. There were a few pictures claiming to accept “all” bodies, but even there were people of different sizes, but none with visible disabilities. The points out that even moves to become more inclusive ignore the 26 percent of Americans who have a disability (Center for Disease Control). Other examples of how able-normativity influence disabled athletes include:
-
The expectation of symmetry in design
-
Praising disabled athletes for the wrong reasons
-
Incentive to hide impairments
-
Promoting able-normativity rather than ability
-
Additional respect for able-passing athletes
These are explored in more detail below.
1. The expectation of symmetry in design
As mentioned previously, when athletes with disabilities succeed, they are praised for conforming to the ableist norm, not for the skills they put on display. This plays into the idea that athletics are designed for able-bodied people. Take bodybuilding, for example. One of the scoring guidelines involves the “equal development of muscularity on both right and left sides of the physique.” This rule doesn’t take into consideration people like me, who can’t just grow a muscle or even an entire limb. And in some ways, sports exclude or diminish the experiences of disabled participants just because of the way they are designed.
2. Praising disabled athletes for the wrong reasons
Even when disabled athletes perform without any differences due to their impairment, emphasis is put on their weakness rather than their strength. Heather Mills is an amputee previously featured on “Dancing with the Stars.” Watch the video below and see if you notice anything different about the way she is filmed.
Notice how the camera frequently zoomed in on her legs but not those of her partner, Jonathan Roberts, even though Mills’ “performance on the show was in part notable for its lack of notability.”
Here are two of the close ups from the Dancing with the Stars video. There weren’t close ups on Mill’s partner’s legs.
In other words, she was treated differently from other contestants because she happened to have a prosthetic, not because of how she performed. This overemphasis on her overcoming of disability rather than talent was also noted by Amanda Booher, who stated that “her status as an amputee underscored her participation in the competition.” Because Mills had a prosthetic leg, her routine was seen as a statement rather than just a routine, and while she could serve as a role model to others with prosethetics, the fact that she is compared to a normal body to measure her success demonstrates how ableism manifests itself in athletics.
To admire a disabled athlete for overcoming their “weakness” sometimes brings to light the stigma that people should do their best to get over their unique embodiments and avoid the accommodations that make their lives easier. Booher points out that the act of “calling attention to their [Mills] achievements of ‘normal’ despite their lack of physical ‘normalcy’” is taking these “strong, healthy women who are extremely capable” and turning their story into one in which “we are […] reminded that the reason for this attention is precisely their amputation/prosthetic.” In the mind of the ableist public, Mills is unique not because of what they do, but because of who they are. The imposition of normalcy upon people with disabilities takes the joyful innocence of wanting to better oneself away, replacing it with an animalistic feeling of unbelonging, which can be only alleviated by passing as abled.
3. Incentive to hide impariments

Harold Kelley, nicknamed “King Kong,” was the five-time winner of Arnold Classic Wheelchair Bodybuilding Competition and winner or many other competitions, including Europa Dallas Pro Wheelchair and Olympia Wheelchair Pro. While able bodybuilders expose almost all of their skin, Kelley and his competitors hide their entire lower body.
“Imperfect Perfection and Wheelchair Bodybuilding: Challenging Ableism or Reproducing Normalcy?” highlights a story that complicates the relationship between the ideal body and people with disabilities. While competing in professional bodybuilding competitions, Dan shows off his muscular upper body while hiding his atrophied legs under baggy sweatpants. He does this so attention is put on the “normal” part of himself rather than his disability. In this way, his similarity to the “ideal body” is being accentuated while hiding his unique embodiment. On one hand, “Dan is drying an aesthetically based sport to incorporate bodies that are normatively framed as abject, flawed, and undesirable.” Hiding his legs could be interpreted as keeping the attention on what Dan could change rather than what he was stuck with. For Dan, hiding his atrophied legs allows him to focus on what he can change and what he has worked on, and that can be empowering. On the other, what does it say about society if Dan’s talents can only be appreciated when is disability is hidden? In addition, does Dan have an obligation to push society forward or should he not feel guilt for conforming to ableist standards?
“…what does it say about society if Dan’s talents can only be appreciated when his disability is hidden? In addition, does Dan have an obligation to push society forward or should he not feel guilt for conforming to ableist standards?”
As an endurance athlete all throughout high school, I kept my Poland Syndrome a secret because I wanted to be inspirational not because of my unique embodiment, but because I worked hard and was dedicated to my sports. Even as I heard competitors and even my teammates whisper “Ericka gets everything she wants” and “she relies on her talent,” I kept my disadvantage a secret because I wanted to be treated like any other athlete would. Why did I keep my disability a secret, even though it allowed people to de-value the effort I invested in my sports? The only thing worse than being told that I don’t deserve to win races is to be babied because of my circumstances. While hiding my Poland Syndrome and the incredibly painful cramps and difficulty using my arms is a lot to carry on my own, it is nothing compared to the reduced expectations I would have received if I was open about my disability. However, by doing this I missed out on an opportunity to encourage other people with disabilities to pursue sports. Should I feel an obligation to enlighten people on issues surrounding able-normativity?
“Should I feel an obligation to enlighten people on issues surrounding able-normativity?”
4. promoting able-normativity rather than ability

As can be seen in this screenshot from DisabledGym’s website, the normal body is seen as the default, healthy body. The left article indicates that an able body should be the end goal for people with disabilities, even if that is impossible.
Even DisabledGym, a company whose purpose is to introduce disabled people to exercise, emphasizes a normal “ideal” body as the end goal, even though many of their clients don’t have that as an option. One of their articles titled “Do You Want To Feel Good? Be Active!” features a photo of a man and woman with toned muscles, little body fat, and most importantly, no visible disability. This hints at the idea that one can only feel good in a certain type of body, when the truth is that health doesn’t always correspond with being skinny or able-bodied; DisabledGym should emphasize that being healthy and active can take many forms outside of the body that society idealizes.
5. Additional respect for able-passing athletes
Along with the empowering feeling a disabled person feels when they achieve physical feats, comes additional respect from their peers; while the latter may sound positive, what are the consequences of a society that grants respect only to those who fulfill the ideal body type? A study of physically active disabled men showed that while a big motivation for participating in sports was “countering stereotypes of their physical incompetence,” they also thought that “sport and physical activity compensates for negative perceptions about the appearance of the disabled body.” The interviewees also noted how people treated them with more humanity when they were in better shape. Just like anybody else, these men felt pressure not only from themselves, but from others, and far too often respect is only granted by others if their body passes as able. Underneath the athlete defying the odds, there is the need to be respected, which is unfortunately dependent on how much their body conforms to societal norms. While an active lifestyle should be encouraged for people with disabilities, everyone should be treated with respect no matter what their body looks like.
How can we combat Able-Normativity in athletics?
1. Implement universal design in athletic facilities

This list of examples of universal design provided by the North Carolina Office on Disability and Health includes features and practices that benefit abled and disabled people. While these features are necessary for many with disabilities, they can be convenient to other gym users, especially the elderly.
Universal design is the concept that we should build with accessibility in mind not only for people with disabilities, but for everyone; many accessibility features are helpful for everybody and can make life safer and easier. As stated by North Carolina Officee on Disability and Heath in collaboration with The Center for Universal Design, “Universal design considers how the build environment and products can be used to the greatest extent possible by everyone, regardless of age or ability.” In other words, universal design explains how there are ways in which we can make facilities more accessibility not just for the benefit of those with disabilities, but for the benefit of the entire population.
2. Promote sports designed for people of all abilities
A specific example of universal design effectively working to take down the perceptions of disabled people in sports is sitting volleyball. As mentioned in “Sliding to Reverse Ableism: An Ethnographic Exploration of (Dis)ability in Sitting Volleyball“ by Carla Silva and David Howe, this sport mirrors normal volleyball, except players scoot around with their arms instead of standing on their feet (many of the players don’t have them). It is open to people of all abilities, and it turns out that having legs can actually be a disadvantage on the court.
The coexistence of people of varying ability in athletics provides a space where people are recognized for their accomplishments rather than their disability and blurs the current distinct line between able-bodied sport and parasport. This supports a broader classification system for people with disabilities while actually allowing people of varying ability to interact together. By focusing on the ability of each individual rather than generalizing a diverse group, sitting volleyball “proved that parasport can accommodate diverse impairments in the same activity, rather than following the same impairment-differentiation logic as that of medical institutions.”
The success of this sport at promoting athletic inclusivity suggests that it can be mimicked in other areas. Sitting volleyball is a sport that is naturally applicable to a more diverse array of bodies, challenging the perception that people with disabilities must only compete with others with the same disability, and that physical impediments are always a disadvantage.
Taking advantage of circumstances

Oscar Pistorious built a successful running career in parasports and the Olympics. Unfortunately, he is often remembered for his participation in the Olympics rather than the records he set in the Paralympics. In this way, the media decided to focus on his disability rather than his achievements in the Paralympics. He was temporarily banned from competing in able-bodied sports because his disability was said to be an advantage. https://cdn.24.co.za/files/Cms/General/d/527/21b449cbe2d54962b5229adf870dd5ef.jpg
While there are people making headway against athletic ableism in taxonomy and gym design, it can also be tackled in competition. In his TedTalk “Disability Sport is the Future,” Abu Yilla defies the notion that disabilities are always a disadvantage in sports (what he calls the “Tyranny of Normative Thought”) by giving examples of instances throughout athletic history when impaired athletes beat out their competitors. Take, for example, Tony Volpentest, a double amputee from below the knee. He competed in paralympic track, and while the assumption is that running with no legs would be more difficult than running with one leg, Volpentest was able to increase his height, therefore his stride length, by getting unnaturally tall prosthetic legs!
Not only did these athletes challenge the notion that disabilities are always a disadvantage, but they did this by taking advantage of able-normative rules that excluded people like them. Rather than attempting to look normal like Dan, Mills, and Renertsen, they saw their disability as an opportunity not given to people with normal bodies.
Why does this matter?
Even in a world of imperfect bodies, everybody is held up to the standard of symmetrical muscles, minimal body fat, and a fully functioning body. If a person physically can’t exist at that ideal, they are judged based on how able-bodied they can act. In fact, athletics originated as the pursuit of the ideal body. A quick glimpse at ancient Greek athletic sculptures with toned, fully mobile bodies shows that “Modern sport originated from the desire to cultivate human perfection and physical, psychological, and moral excellence through the training and disciplining of the body” (as mentioned in “The Social Empowerment of Difference). As athletics follows this idea, its rules and regulations often discriminate against or simply don’t take into account people with abnormal bodies. Whether the assumption of an able body in athletics is an advantage or disadvantage to athletes with disabilities, it shouldn’t exist. Rules must be changed to account for those with the abnormal body, because we exist and we exist with dignity. If we are going to praise those who are athletic despite a physical hardship, we must also make a space that is more inclusive to bodies of all sizes and shapes. After all, I would have given anything for my younger self to be able to turn the channel to ESPN and see others who were born imperfect succeed because they wanted to, not because they had to.