親密「越／悅」界：身心障礙者的情慾、親密實作與性治理(I)

南華大學機構典藏系統 > 社會科學院 > 應用社會學系(社會工作與社會設計碩士班,教育社會學碩士班) > 國科會計畫 > Item 987654321/24764

jsp.display-item.identifier=請使用永久網址來引用或連結此文件: http://nhuir.nhu.edu.tw/handle/987654321/24764

题名:	親密「越／悅」界：身心障礙者的情慾、親密實作與性治理(I)
其它题名:	Disability and Its Sexual Discontents: Re-Drawing the Boundaries of Hierarchy and Dignity in the Intimate Landscape of Compulsory Able-Bodieness
作者:	陳伯偉
貢獻者:	南華大學應用社會學系
日期:	2016
上传时间:	2016-11-08 11:19:37 (UTC+8)
摘要:	障礙研究對公領域的社會分析，遠多過對私領域的理解；障礙者的性、情慾與親密實作，更常缺席在社會學者的分析。本研究為3年期計畫，透過深度訪談身心障礙者（預計共80人）的情慾實作與親密關係，並同時提供重要意義關係人（預計共40人）對障礙經驗的理解，具體勾勒出隱身在親密關係常規性背後的「強迫性身心健全」（“compulsory able-bodieness，McRuer2006)對障礙者不公的性治理。延續筆者過去3年對邊緣族群性存有空間的關懷，本計晝將聚焦於下列三點分析面向：（1)首先，透過「感知的身體」（“affective body” , Blackman 2008)理解身障者如何體現「強迫性身心健全」的專屬親密腳本（及其社會排除）；同時，說明身障者的多元情慾體現，如何挑戰社會對親密關係的既有僵化想像；（2)其次，透過分析重要意義關係人如何理解身心障礙者的性，本研究將具體勾勒出不同權力場域如何互謀共構，讓障礙者的情慾禁聲沉默；同時，分析也將試圖辨識出哪些資源協助與環境提供，得以讓障礙者發展自身被漠視的情慾實作；（3)最後，本研究將挑戰「強迫性身心健全」對心智礙障者具備親密關係資格的質疑與否定，批判從「去性化」與「過度性化」的二元觀點看待心智障礙者的情慾，並從「能力」取向（“capabilities” , Nussbaum 2006)的社會正義詮釋框架，重新思考如何協助心智障礙者發展自身被漠視的情慾與親密實作能力，擁有被剝奪的性存有空間，並享有生命應有的基本樣貌與人性的尊嚴。預期研究成果將填補障礙研究相關理論與經驗分析上的缺口，並對相關政策與施政方針做出反思與具體建議。 Research on disability primarily explores how to make the public dimension of space, social services and jobs accessible to men and women with disabilities. We know less about access to the private dimension of sexual desire and intimate lives amongst disabled individuals. This research contributes to the existing literature by examining the under-explored terrain of what intimacy and sexualities mean to men and women with significant disabilities. It addresses how the disabled individuals are enabled and/or denied access to emotional and sexual satisfactions with people; and what we can do to help them develop their capability for forming relations that involve sexual pleasure and love. From a qualitative perspective, this research will be divided into three facets. First, derived from the affective turn (Blackman 2008) in body studies, the analysis reveals both corporeally and affectively how “compulsory able-bodiedness” (McRuer 2006) shapes and marginalizes the erotic lives amongst people with severe forms of physical disability, while simultaneously recognizing how their creative and non-conforming sexual practices undo dominant scripts about intimacy and social negativity of their bodies. Second, in analyzing the perspectives from significant others (e.g. parents, carers, professionals and authorities etc.), who work with and care for individuals with disabilities, this research examines how sexualities of the disabled are silenced and denied, while identifying the multiple and interlocking social conditionings that prevent the socially vulnerable from having intimate encounters. This, in turns, invites further consideration for what it means in practices to engage with the lives of individuals who need particularly kinds of assistance to be able to live with sexual dignity. Third, in approaching adults with serious intellectual disabilities, this research challenges “compulsory able-bodiedness” and its unfair presumptions that disqualify entitlements of intimacy for people with intellectual disabilities at the first place. Specifically, it questions the patronizing stereotype of adult women with intellectual disabilities as children, and the prejudice against their male counterparts as sexual predators. Rather than simply perceiving disability as both sexual lack and sexual excess, this research deploy the notion of “capabilities” （Nussbaum 2006 ； Kulick and Rydstrom 2015) to understand how individuals with significant intellectual impairments and their intimate capabilities can be facilitated, developed and flourished. This encourages further exploration of a network of facilitations that need to get coordinated in order to allow the stigmatized to be able to flourish intimacy with dignity. The intersection of disability with gender, class and sexualities will also be addressed. In sum, this research contributes to the under-theorized and under-politicized private sphere of the disabled lives. It extends the existing literature by simultaneously bringing together the lived experiences of individuals with physical and intellectual disabilities. It further problematizes the prerequisite of both “healthy” body and mind for “compulsory able-bodiedness” and its social/sexual exclusions. It also sheds light on the ethics of engagement for the socially vulnerable. In analyzing disability and its sexual discontents, this research hopes to re-draw the boundaries of hierarchy and dignity in the affective economy of ableism and its compulsory existence.
显示于类别:	[應用社會學系(社會工作與社會設計碩士班,教育社會學碩士班)] 國科會計畫

文件中的档案:

没有与此文件相关的档案.

在NHUIR中所有的数据项都受到原著作权保护.

TAIR相关文章

数据加载中.....