In this article, we undertake a reflective narrative inquiry into the GimpGirl Community (GGC), an online group of women with disabilities. We explore 12 years of GGC activity through community archives and auto-biographic narratives of GGC organizers, to understand how these women actively created a safe and open space for like-minded individuals, how community members used diverse online technologies for community building and social interaction, and how these online tools allow some members to experiment with their notions of self and identity outside dominant discourses. Our analysis of the lived experiences of GGC members reveals how they challenge the boundary between ‘abled’ and ‘disabled,’ and enact agency beyond their marginalization as women and as individuals with disabilities.
BarronK (1997) The bumpy road to womanhood. Disability & Society12(2): 223–240.
2.
BowkerNTuffinK (2002) Disability discourses for online identities. Disability and Society17(3): 327–344.
3.
ChenWWellmanB (2005) Minding the cyber-gap. The Internet and social inequality. In RomeroMMargolisE (eds) Blackwell Companion to Social Inequalities. Oxford: Blackwell.
4.
ClandininDJConnellyFM (2000) Narrative Inquiry. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
5.
ColeJ (2009) GimpGirl Community: Supporting the lives of women with disabilities. Paper presented at Sex::Tech Conference, San Francisco, CA, 22–23 March.
DobranskyKHargittaiE (2006) The disability divide in Internet access and use. Information, Communication and Society9(3): 313–334.
8.
FerriBAGreggN (1998) Women with disabilities: Missing voices. Women’s Studies International Forum21(4): 429–439.
9.
FinnJ (1999) An exploration of helping processes in an online self-help group focusing on issues of disability. Health and Social Work24(3): 220–231.
10.
HaythornthwaiteC (2008) Learning relations and networks in web-based communities. International Journal of Web Based Communities4(2): 140–158.
11.
HineC (2000) Virtual Ethnography. London: Sage.
12.
HughesB (2005) What can a Foucauldian analysis contribute to disability theory? In TremainS (ed.) Foucault and the Government of Disability. Michigan: University of Michigan Press.
13.
KatzJRiceR (2002) Social Consequences of Internet Use: Access, Involvement, and Interaction. Boston, MA: MIT Press.
14.
KendallL (1996) MUDder? I hardly know ‘Er! Adventures of a Feminist MUDder. In ChernyLWeiseE (eds) wired_women. Seattle, WA: Seal, 207–233.
15.
LambekM (2005) Our subjects/ourselves: A view from the back seat. In MeneleyAYoungDJ (eds) Auto-ethnographies. Toronto: Broadview Press, 229–240.
16.
LatherP (1995) The validity of angels: Interpretive and textual strategies in researching the lives of women with HIV/AIDS. Qualitative Inquiry1(1): 41–68.
17.
MancusoKColeJ (2009) GimpGirl community’s best practices for facilitating an accessible community in a virtual world. Poster presented atIEEE Accessing the Future Conference, Boston, MA, 20–21 July. Available at: http://ewh.ieee.org/conf/accessingthefuture/documents/mancuso.pdf (consulted July 2009).
MorrisMOganC (1996) The internet as mass medium. The Journal of Communication46(1): 39–50.
20.
MoserI (2006) Disability and the promises of technology: Technology, subjectivity and embodiment within an order of the normal. Information, Communication and Society9(3): 373–395.
21.
NolanJWeissJ (2002) Learning cyberspace: An educational view of virtual community. In RenningerAShumarW (eds) Building Virtual Communities. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
22.
OspinaAColeJNolanJ (2008) GimpGirl grows up: Women with disabilities rethinking, redefining, and reclaiming community. Paper presented at Internet Research 9.0, Copenhagen, 15–18 October.
23.
PendergrassSNosekMHolcombJ (2001) Design and evaluation of an internet site to educate women with disabilities on reproductive health care. Sexuality and Disability19(1): 71–83.
24.
RheingoldH (1994) The Virtual Community: Homesteading on the Electronic Frontier. Reading, MA: HarperPerennial.
25.
Sponaas-RobinsRNolanJ (2005) MOOs: Polysynchronous collaborative virtual environments. In ZemlianskyPSt AmantK (eds) Workplace Internet-based Communication. New York: Idea Group, 130–156.
26.
TraharS (2009) Beyond the story itself: Narrative inquiry and autoethnography in intercultural research in higher education. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research10(1): Art 30. Available at: http://www.qualitative-research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/1218/2654 (consulted September 2010).
27.
ValentineGSkeltonT (2009) An umbilical cord to the world. Information, Communication and Society12(1): 44–65.
28.
van DijkJHackerK (2003) The digital divide as a complex and dynamic phenomenon. The Information Society19: 315–326.
29.
van ManenM (1997)Researching Lived Experience. London, Ontario: Althouse.
30.
YoungDJMeneleyA (2005) Introduction: Auto-ethnographies of academic practices. In MeneleyAYoungDJ (eds) Auto-ethnographies. Toronto: Broadview Press, 1–22.
