[SDS] The Stubblefield case on the Feminist Philosophers' Blog

Brenda Brueggemann brendabrueggemann at gmail.com
Mon Oct 26 21:09:06 EDT 2015


Ditto what Janet said:  Wow. The ignorance and hubris is overwhelming.



*Brenda Jo Brueggemann*

Professor, English
Director of Composition
The University of Louisville
brenda.brueggemann at louisville.edu

Chair, Society for Disability Studies (SDS) Board of Directors
brendabrueggemann at gmail.com


On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 8:14 PM, Janet Lyon <jwl12 at psu.edu> wrote:

> Wow. The ignorance and hubris is overwhelming.
>
> Janet Lyon
> Sent from Surface
>
> *From:* <devva at earthlink.net> <devva at earthlink.net>
> *Sent:* ‎Sunday‎, ‎October‎ ‎25‎, ‎2015 ‎6‎:‎39‎ ‎PM
> *To:* sds-discuss at lists.disstudies.org, DISABILITY-RESEARCH at JISCMAIL.AC.UK,
> DISABILITYSCHOLARS-L at GC.LISTSERV.CUNY.EDU, 'Disability Studies in the
> Humanities' <DS-HUM at LISTSERV.UMD.EDU>
> *Cc:* emily.brooks at spsmail.cuny.edu, danielle.lucchese at spsmail.cuny.edu,
> edward.ward at spsmail.cuny.edu, maureen.lovetro at spsmail.cuny.edu, Nadina
> LaSpina <nlaspina at disabilityculture.org>
>
>
> https://feministphilosophers.wordpress.com/2015/02/23/update-on-the-stubblefield-sexual-assault-case/#comment-143135
>
>
>
> I had to respond. This is not my first post to them but this really hit me.
>
>
>
> 1.    [image:
> https://2.gravatar.com/avatar/5355bbf03daaa6ed30f3a41f407e3d5f?s=48&d=]*Ralf
> Schlosser <http://www.northeastern.edu/bouve/directory/ralf-schlosser/>*
>  Says:
>
> October 22, 2015 at 5:09 pm
> <https://feministphilosophers.wordpress.com/2015/02/23/update-on-the-stubblefield-sexual-assault-case/#comment-143062>
>
> Re # 17. Noetika you mentioned that you had asked Disability Studies
> Quarterly whether they would consider removing the piece that was
> supposedly authored by DJ. Please keep us in the loop if you hear back
> about your request. Thank you!
>
> 2.    [image:
> https://2.gravatar.com/avatar/2c7db0c76752aff22c1cff4195df17a9?s=48&d=]
> *noetika* Says:
>
> October 22, 2015 at 11:19 pm
> <https://feministphilosophers.wordpress.com/2015/02/23/update-on-the-stubblefield-sexual-assault-case/#comment-143079>
>
> Ralf, thanks for asking about this — they just never replied to my email.
> I was actually just wondering last night if I should share it with a few
> friends and ask them if they feel the question is important too, to write
> their own letters asking for a response.
>
> 3.    [image:
> https://2.gravatar.com/avatar/efe74d8f8de98b7b0eb468c5403e32b4?s=48&d=]
> *mm* Says:
>
> October 23, 2015 at 2:21 am
> <https://feministphilosophers.wordpress.com/2015/02/23/update-on-the-stubblefield-sexual-assault-case/#comment-143084>
>
> I agree that the journal should retract the paper. It’s also important to
> know whether they are unwilling to do this, since it would not bode well
> for the standards of scholarships of the editors of this journal if they
> are not.
>
>
>
>
>
> Woah! You just displayed an incredible dose of academic imperialism over
> disability studies to threaten us! The ink is not yet dry on a highly
> disputed case that will be appealed with wide support of amicus briefs
> being offered by national legal justice organizations on many grounds and
> you want us to remove authorship of a published article because one judge
> and one jury declared that its author was raped? The jury made this
> decision with very little of the FC debate in evidence. It is not clear
> that a lack of trust in FC was the most important factor in their decision,
> nor even his “mental defectiveness.” The conviction could be based only on
> his “physical helplessness.” NJ law, as interpreted by this judge in the
> final injunction, acts as if statutory rape exists when guardianship is
> involved. What you are suggesting is that you only believe it was rape
> because the victim could not consent by reason of his intellect, therefore
> meaning that he could not have written the article. Maybe it was rape
> because he did not consent? Maybe it was him typing all but the sexual
> consent part? You don’t know. We don’t know. No one has the text of those
> conversations, if they existed. Do we strike all of someone’s work because
> they were “proven” by a jury to be the victim of rape by their mentor?
> Isn’t that blaming the victim? If you can’t separate these issues you don’t
> understand disability studies. The only juror to speak so far made it very
> clear that they decided day one that only a pervert would want to have sex
> with D. J..
>
>
>
> I’ve been a member of the Society for Disability Studies (SDS) since the
> beginning in 1985. I’m sending this on to the new DSQ editors and the
> editorial board, which I’m on. The day we ask people to prove authorship of
> articles because someone else claims that their disability is other than as
> presented because 12 people in NJ decide the author was raped, is the day I
> go back to the prior SDS. D. J. has been denied all access to communication
> except through his family. How could we let him know his authorship has
> been challenged? We can’t deny him the opportunity to defend his work
> because he was raped, if he was. I’ll let history decide.
>
>
>
> Devva
>
>
>
>
>
> *Devva Kasnitz, PhD*
>
> City University of New York—School of Professional Studies—Disability
> Studies Telecommunications Access for the Deaf and Disabled
> Administrative Committee, CA
>
>
>
> 1614 D Street
>
> Eureka, CA  95501-2345
>
> Text and Voicemail:  (510) 206-5767
>
> Skype:  devva.kasnitz
>
> Email:  devva at earthlink.nets
>
>
>
> If you don’t know me, I prefer email, Skype with IM, or text as I do have
> a significant speech impairment.
>
>
>
> *Occupying Disability: Critical Approaches to Community, Justice, and
> Decolonizing Disability*
> Editors: Block, P., Kasnitz, D., Nishida, A., Pollard, N.
>
> http://www.springer.com/us/book/9789401799836
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sds-discuss mailing list
> Sds-discuss at lists.disstudies.org
>
> http://lists.disstudies.org/mailman/listinfo/sds-discuss_lists.disstudies.org
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.disstudies.org/pipermail/sds-discuss_lists.disstudies.org/attachments/20151026/a43607c0/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image003.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 1783 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.disstudies.org/pipermail/sds-discuss_lists.disstudies.org/attachments/20151026/a43607c0/attachment.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 92 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.disstudies.org/pipermail/sds-discuss_lists.disstudies.org/attachments/20151026/a43607c0/attachment.gif>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 1744 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.disstudies.org/pipermail/sds-discuss_lists.disstudies.org/attachments/20151026/a43607c0/attachment-0001.jpg>


More information about the SDS-Discuss mailing list