Colin Barnes' Argument Against Disability Sociology

Good afternoon friends, as most of you know I am a Disability Sociologist by trade and I came across an interesting paper that was published in 1993 arguing against disability sociology. The paper in question is written by gender sociologist Colin Barnes entitled "Disability: a Sociological phenomenon Ignored by Sociologist," 

Before we jump into the crux of Mr. Barnes argument we have to set some groundwork, First and Foremost Mr. Barnes is a Gender sociologist, and as we know disability and gender sociology is often coupled together and research in tandem as we try to see the links between the two and how disability affects gender and how gender affects disability. Secondly, Mr. Barnes lives in works in England where in fairness not a lot of disability research is coming out of England because the United Kingdom's government feels as though they give enough public support to individuals with disabilities for a multitude of reasons sure you give them free healthcare and pay them to sit on their ass and do nothing of the Disabled liberated countries England is second to last in disabled people that hold a bachelor's degree. Most importantly this piece tends to be a prisoner of its time period. 

Now, what Mr. Barnes and his colleague Mike Oliver a functionalist argue is that general sociology is inherently ableist. To be frank I don't take issue with that because in a way it is especially when we begin to look at the absolute mess that is functionalism. Functionalism and conflict theory deal in a lot of absolutes. General sociology is taught and researched for the most part in these two perspectives and schools of thought. I've never quite understood functionalism because sociology at its core should be open to interpretation and is focused on interaction and how the interactions and the built culture around us shape us as human beings. To teach sociology from a functionalist perspective to me is silly and gives the wrong perception of our discipline. The argument of teaching from the interactionist perspective is that it becomes too limiting and gives off the perception that we are only worried about micro-interactions which is also a silly misread of the situation, but that is another blog post. 

Where Mr. Barnes and Mr. Oliver misstep here is their need for disability sociology to be a macro approach this is what hurts because at the end of the day we as disability sociologists will never care to be macro sociologists because we deal with a large yet specialized and interconnected population. The only time we use macro sociology is to explain its importance by telling people we are the only minority anyone can join at any point in your life. As much as respect this paper we have to understand the discipline has grown over the last 28 years and continues to grow. Also just because it is ignored by functionalist that are trying to push papers out every three months doesn't mean the entire fucking discipline has forgotten. It's a lot like saying sociology doesn't factor in race to the equation that is just stupid.