This article aims to provide some elements of definition and reflection on the concept of "validism". Imported from the Anglo-Saxon world, it has been found for several years in France in works in the field of human and social sciences. New extension of wokism¹, disability joins other axes of exclusion and domination, such as race or gender. Let us look at its genesis.

Origin and meaning of the term “validism”

The term "validism" is the French translation ofableism², deriving from English able, "capable" or "apt". It appeared in the 1960s and 70s in England and the United States in the context of a combination of forces between university approaches - in particular those of disability studies – and activist movements for the civil rights of people with disabilities³.

To understand the ins and outs of the concept of ableism, it is important to look back at the construction of the notion of disability from which it was forged. The contemporary way of thinking about disability is rooted in the model proposed by PH Wood, and taken up by the World Health Organization in its International Classification of Disabilities (CIH) in 1980. Within this nomenclature, disability is defined as a disadvantage social generated by the disease. It is part of a "chain" modeling of phenomena in which we find at one end the disease (the biomedical cause), and at the other the disability (its social consequence). The disabled individual is therefore one who is unable to meet the expectations of his environment and to fully occupy his social role due to the condition he presents, whether the latter is physical or mental, congenital or acquired. From this proposition, and in articulation with the principles of full social participation and non-discrimination, the idea of compensation aiming, through the proposal of specific support, to “correct” this damage.

This modeling of disability, which is part of a perspective rehabilitative, has been hotly contested in the Anglo-Saxon world since the 1980s, and this, by associative actors⁴. These voices believe that the CIH conveys the idea that disability is solely attributable to the individual (he is disabled Parts and accessories he is ill), presenting disability as a “personal tragedy” and evading the role of society in its creation. We find the Foucauldian notion of power that forces individuals to conform to the normative oppressive discourse. Moreover, to the extent that it refers to the “lack” of the person, this definition is perceived as devaluing and excluding. Denouncing the pejorative connotations associated with this terminology, and supported by researchers and medical representatives, these associations demand (and obtain) a revision of the ICIDH.

This protest testifies to the strength of the current movement, which will find an academic basis in numerous publications and a strong presence in the media and the scientific community, particularly in North America. It is clear that the objective of this movement aims to erase a model of understanding medical and individual of disability to replace it with a new interpretation based on a paradigm social, which is part of the disability studies U.S.⁵.
The concept of validism thus arises from this rejection of a biomedical basis for disability in order to claim the idea that the latter would only be the product of a society validist, in other words, that the norm of the "non-disabled" citizen would socially construct the disabled individual. We find a woke postmodern approach where the constructions of power would aim to exclude the oppressed from the dominant discourse of society. Validism thus denounces the hegemonic model of the "healthy citizen" presenting a functional body and mind, hostile to other forms of corporeality. This approach was reinforced, in a second phase, by feminist and anti-racist activist movements, which have strongly contributed to structuring it on a widely shared theoretical basis: a bipartite reading of social relations inspired by Foucauldianism. Validist norms are thus judged oppressive and as such join the expectations of "gender conformity", which makes it possible to envisage an "intersectional" reading of these issues where individuals "accumulate" discriminated identities.

The introduction of the concept of validism in France

This genealogy done, let us now look at the presence of the notion of ableism in the French academic field. It is perhaps useful here to recall that in France, disability appears as an administrative category that has considerably expanded in recent years to include, for example, cases of autism spectrum disorders, attention deficit disorders or specific language and learning disorders (such as dyslexia). Disability therefore covers a wide variety of situations that do not overlap with each other, and therefore does not correspond to a homogeneous entity.

It was through activist channels that the term "validism" appeared for the first time in France, in a 2004 manifesto signed by Z. Blanquer, a "handicap" activist.⁶ », and entitled “The culture of the able-bodied (Western)⁷ ». If, from this text, and for several years, it is activism which has mainly seized upon the concept of validism⁸, it is clear that its presence in the French scientific field – although still relatively marginal – has recently intensified. This is how we have seen the emergence of interest in “handicapped” studies.⁹ » , as evidenced for example by the “Handicap” entry proposed by the Dictionary of Gender in Translation¹⁰, emanation of theInternational Research Network World Gender, notably supported by the CNRS and French universities¹¹. This notice is the result of the collaboration of different researchers affiliated with Parisian research centers. C. Puiseux, doctor of philosophy, contributor of this entry, presents validism as an oppressive system experienced by disabled people because of their non-correspondence to the medical standards defining the criteria of validity. According to her, validism supports a perspective in which "disabled bodies are perceived very negatively, as bodies representing the evil counterpart of able-bodied bodies¹².

From this point of view, validity is perceived as "naturalized". We note that disability is resolutely rejected as an individual characteristic, to be understood as a determination "imposed" by a dominant validist society, which moreover would only recognize disability to better "exalt more the bodies and minds judged to be healthy, valid¹³. From this perspective, from the point of view of disabled people, accepting human assistance could be experienced as an act of allegiance to ableist supremacy, or even confront them with its “potential for domination and violence” corresponding to “the experience of receiving bodily care and the fear of feeling at the mercy of the person who takes care of them, of being in a situation of great vulnerability due to the asymmetry of positions¹⁴. This is how a real "empire of validity" is denounced.¹⁵ » system generating dominating standards linked to a human ideal that would "invalidate" "non-standard" subjectivities, pushing some to compare validism to eugenics. These authors thus call for a general "devalidation", in the sense of a deconstruction-destruction of the validist despotism in place¹⁶. So anyone who believes that there is a usual, or even majority, physical form risks being accused of "validism".

The first effects of validism on the French scientific debate are substantially comparable to those exerted by other "-isms" (sexism, classism, masculinism, speciesism, etc.), such as those recruited by the "academic-militant" milieu.¹⁷ » and to which it “naturally” attaches itself. Validism in fact applies the same compartmentalizing reading grid which confiscates from the researcher, and indirectly from the populations in which he is interested, access to the complexity of the experience.