Author: Maheen Naseem – Contact: Contact Details
Published: 2025/03/28
Publication Type: Opinion Piece, Editorial
Topic: Editorials and Op-eds – Publications List
Page Content: Synopsis – Introduction – Main – Insights, Updates
Synopsis: Hollywood’s inaccurate disability portrayals, inspiration porn, and erasure in adaptations are critiqued, advocating for authentic representation through the disabled gaze.
Why it matters: This article critically examines Hollywood’s ongoing struggle with accurate disability representation, highlighting the pervasive issue of “inspiration porn” and the harmful stereotypes it perpetuates. It discusses how films and TV shows often depict disabled characters as either tragic figures or extraordinary geniuses, reinforcing a narrow and unrealistic perspective. The article also explores the troubling erasure of disability in book-to-movie adaptations, further marginalizing disabled voices. Additionally, it addresses the growing trend of neurodivergent audiences identifying with characters who exhibit unconfirmed but relatable traits. The piece argues for the necessity of the “disabled gaze” in filmmaking – meaning authentic representation through the involvement of disabled creators at every stage of production. This perspective is valuable for anyone interested in media representation, particularly individuals with disabilities, seniors, and those advocating for more nuanced and respectful portrayals in entertainment – Disabled World (DW).
Introduction
Keypoints:
In my opinion piece, I talk about disability discrimination in Hollywood by elaborating on:
- 1. The problem with ‘Inspiration Porn’ – a storytelling narrative that uses disability as a tool to inspire and impress non-disabled viewers, often portraying disabled people as objects of heroism and admiration.
- 2. The Eradication of Disability Representation in Book-to-Movie Adaptations.
- 3. How the Disability Community (particularly the neurodivergent community) is tired of waiting for Hollywood to get Disability Representation right and is taking it upon themselves to identify with characters that showcase neurodivergent signs even though it’s not confirmed that they are on the spectrum (this is called Headcanons).
- 4. The Disabled Gaze – a phenomenon similar to the female gaze that rejects stereotypical perceptions of disability.
Main Item
“I don’t think I will be a very inspiring disabled person,” These were the exact words said by Cam Tucker, a character in the sitcom Modern Family, which ended in 2020. Yet every time I hear this line, it makes my eye twitch.
Growing up, whenever I saw a TV show or movie where one of the characters had a physical disability similar to mine (Cerebral Palsy), I used to get so excited; I felt so seen. However, as I grew up, I began to see how Hollywood puts unrealistic and stereotypical ideas in people’s minds. Now, whenever I come across stereotypical disability representation on screen, my skin crawls. And let’s be honest: accurate disability representation is a consistent struggle for Hollywood.
“Inspiration Porn”- It’s a Problem
The whole perception of being an ‘inspiring’ disabled person stems from a concept known as ‘inspiration porn,’ a storytelling narrative that utilizes disability as a tool to inspire and essentially impress non-disabled viewers into believing disabled people should be viewed as objects of heroism and admiration.
A clear example of this is The Theory of Everything, a biopic about Stephen Hawking that, for most of the film, highlights Hawking’s physical shortcomings. The fact that the story of a disabled genius is being presented in a documentary that focuses on his disability highlights the perception that Hollywood only sheds light on stories they deem ‘worthy’ and ‘extraordinary’ enough.
Such approaches to disability representation have also been made in fictional storytelling, as the show The Good Doctor tells the story of an autistic surgeon; showcasing that despite his disability, he is a genius doctor. However, as the show progresses, there are instances where the main character tends to make mistakes and engage in malpractice, all of which gets blamed on the fact that he is autistic, leaving the audience with the impression that while we should feel inspired that the main character is a medical genius, we should also feel pity as his autism becomes an ‘obstacle’ during his career.
Another harmful way ‘inspiration porn’ is represented in Hollywood is through the framing of disability as an extreme tragedy. The movie Me Before You perpetuates the harmful trope that because someone has a disability, their life is not worth living. The film ends with assisted suicide (euthanasia), framing it as an act of ‘love. ‘ This narrative not only reinforces the idea that disability is tragic but also promotes the dangerous notion that death is a better option than living with a disability.
These narratives reinforce stereotypes rather than challenge them. They frame disabled people as either heroic for enduring their condition or pitiable for being unable to escape it. Additionally, Hollywood’s decision to shed light on ‘extraordinary’ cases such as Stephen Hawking or a fictional genius doctor ultimately sends the message to disabled people that your story is only worth telling if you do something remarkable.
Such portrayals do little to normalize disability and instead leave non-disabled viewers with an inaccurate and reductive understanding of disabled lives. This misrepresentation can lead to societal attitudes that either overly romanticize or pity disabled individuals rather than recognizing them as fully capable and complex human beings.
The Eradication of Disability Representation in Book-to-Movie Adaptations
There are also situations where disability representation within Hollywood is eliminated during executive decisions regarding book-to-movie adaptations. These decisions communicate to the audience that disability representation is a non-priority in adaptations of stories where disability is not the sole focus and that disability representation can not coexist in every genre of storytelling; it’s either the primary source of conflict or not there at all. Once again, it showcases the dangers of extremism within Hollywood representations.
Take the Hunger Games series, a dystopian novel that symbolizes the struggles of war and fighting for freedom. In the series, the male main character, Peeta Mellark, loses his left leg and becomes an amputee, showing his emotional journey of losing his leg and the ability to walk during a time of chaos and struggle would have been the type of representation the disability community would have appreciated. But the complete erasure of this storyline downplayed the reality of resilience and sent the message to book readers of the series that disability representation was not a priority during this widespread adoption; a missed opportunity, too, if you ask me.
Another example of Hollywood adaption of books that subtly removes disability from the story is the first season of Bridgerton. During the first season of Bridgerton, people mainly focused on how diverse the cast was and applauded Shonda Rhimes for casting people of color. People often see Bridgerton as an excellent example of inclusivity within storytelling; Shonda Rhimes deserves tremendous praise for the racially inclusive direction in which she took the series. However, while people were busy praising the involvement of people of color, no one pointed out (not even the people who read the book series) just how unsettling it was to see a watered-down version of disability representation within the first season. In the books, Simon, the Duke of Hastings, has a stutter, managed to hide his speech impediment in adulthood by not speaking much , and gained a reputation as a relatively silent man. In the show, they made it a point to highlight that Simon apparently grew out of his stutter, and only then did he begin to fit into society. Some might argue that showing young Simon growing up with a speech impediment is still considered disability representation. However, I am not one of those people. Showcasing adult Simon (now a Duke) having a stutter that he hides due to social pressure would have been much more effective. People who, to this day, mask their disabilities would have connected with Simon, and fans would have adored him more. Furthermore, if the show had kept Simon’s stutter, we would have seen Daphne, the main female protagonist, the Diamond of the season-the woman every man wanted that season- come to terms with the fact that while she was ‘perfect’ in society’s eyes, the man she fell in love with wasn’t, (according to society)` and that is fine. It would have been a fantastic arc for Daphne to let go of perfection and deepen Simon and Daphne’s connection.
These choices are more than artistic liberties; they reflect societal discomfort with disability. By erasing disabilities from characters, Hollywood reinforces the notion that disabled people are too complicated or unappealing to portray, further marginalizing an already underrepresented community.
Neurodivergent Community and Headcanons
The hunger for accurate portrayal has grown so much that people are now identifying with characters that are rarely confirmed to be part of the disability community. This trend is particularly prevalent in the neurodivergent community. Whether it’s the internet celebrating Frachessca Bridgerton’s (in season 3) autistic traits or declaring the new Addams family adaptation (Wednesday) as the most ‘autistic-coded’ show of the modern world, it’s clear that people are tired of waiting for Hollywood to get it right and are now taking matters into their own hands.
What can be done? – The Disabled Gaze
Disability representation is not the only thing Hollywood has struggled with in the past. Historically, female characters written by men have often been portrayed as lacking depth and being one-dimensional. No matter how hard men try, they cannot fully understand a woman’s experience in life, and the lack of complexity within their female characters is evident. Three stereotypical characteristics of female characters written by men are being overly sexual, boy-crazy, or ‘not like other girls.’ These tropes are there to appeal to the male gaze.
Now, don’t get me wrong, there are female characters written by women with similar characteristics, but to be honest, those characters are very outdated, and I wholeheartedly believe that even though they were written BY women, they were often written WITH the male gaze in mind. Thankfully, Hollywood is starting to appreciate the female gaze; as a result, more well-rounded, authentic female characters are coming to life.
A similar thing needs to happen to disability representation in Hollywood. To successfully produce authentic disability representation, Hollywood needs to start appreciating the disabled gaze. The first step to this is involving disabled artists in every process of Hollywood: writing, producing, directing, casting, etc. This is not just a suggestion; it’s a necessity. Once this step is repeatedly taken and becomes a norm within Hollywood, authentic disability representation will come to life.
Editorial Note: Hollywood’s track record on disability isn’t just a creative misstep – t’s a cultural signal. When studios lean on tired tropes or erase disability entirely, they’re not just botching a good story; they’re telling millions of people their lives don’t fit the script. The push for a “disabled gaze” isn’t about checking boxes – it’s about handing the pen to those who’ve lived it. Imagine a Bridgerton where Simon’s stutter isn’t a childhood footnote but a layered part of his charm, or a Hunger Games where Peeta’s amputation fuels his grit, not a producer’s cutting-room floor. Until disabled voices shape the narrative, we’re all stuck watching a world that’s less real than it could be, and audiences will continue to sift through misrepresentation, waiting for the industry to catch up with reality – Disabled World (DW).
