Abstract
When in public places, many individuals with physical disabilities experience staring. Although staring is typically seen as uncomplicated and something to be “ignored,” it has consequences for the person being stared and the staree. Few studies have focused on staring experienced by men following spinal cord injury (SCI). Accordingly, this study explored how adult men with SCI give meaning to the staring from others, the consequences for them, and their responses to the staring and to the starer. Principles of modified grounded theory methods were used to conduct a secondary analysis of interview data for 30 male participants from a larger study of community-dwelling individuals with SCI. Themes revealed through analysis related to context-dependent meanings of staring, negative consequences of staring for some men, and positive opportunities for self-growth and interaction with the public. These findings contribute to a more complex understanding of staring and the relationship between the starer and staree in various social circumstances which can support people living with differences in their public interactions, and improve their quality of life.
“Being stared at somehow creates a sense of shame, as though the soul suddenly assumes a face and must hide it, turning away wordless, cast off.”
As Berger (1996) suggests, staring is a social interaction that is both intense and full of meaning. It involves the communication of a message through the eye gaze from the person staring (the “starer”) to the person receiving the stare (the “staree”; Garland-Thomson, 2006, 2009). A person might stare at someone because they are intrigued, puzzled, or even disgusted by the staree’s appearance. Regardless of intent, a stare creates a relationship between the starer and the staree that can be both intimate and antagonistic (Garland-Thomson, 2006). Many individuals receive stares in public; however, for individuals with visible differences (i.e., an individual whose physical appearance is perceived as different by others), the experience of being stared at can be even more complex. These individuals often experience staring because they appear not to be the same as others; for example, they use a mobility device or have lost a body part (Yuen & Hanson, 2002). The complex issue of staring and stigmatization has been noted in previous literature. Being stared at reminds the staree of being different and not normal (Garland-Thomson, 2006). It can be experienced as dehumanizing and diminishing (Langer, Fiske, Taylor, & Chanowitz, 1976). Furthermore, over time, repeated staring by others can contribute to negative self-perceptions (Bull & Rumsey, 1988) and social isolation Partridge and Robinson (1995) for the staree. Staring also communicates an intense reaction by the starer to and “demands a response” (Garland-Thomson, 2006, p. 174) from the staree. For many individuals with a recently acquired spinal cord injury (SCI), being stared at in public is a new and extremely uncomfortable experience (Chau et al., 2008; Sheldon, Renwick, & Yoshida, 2011). Thus, it may contribute to the challenges individuals grapple with in the process of getting back to life in the community after an SCI.
For many individuals with a newly acquired traumatic SCI, being stared at in public is a new and extremely uncomfortable experience (Chau et al., 2008; Sheldon et al., 2011). Not only does acquiring a traumatic SCI immediately lead to a changed body but it can also result in a loss of or change in identity (Adele, David, & Ronan, 2008) and psychosocial difficulties, such as depression, unemployment, and lack of social support (Wu & Chan, 2007). The way in which an individual interacts with the world is also inevitably changed. Suddenly, an individual with an SCI can encounter both physical and social barriers in the community (McKinley & Meade, 2004).
The current estimated number of individuals with SCI in Canada is 85,556 (Farry & Baxter, 2010) and 276,000 in the United States (National Spinal Cord Injury Statistical Center, 2014). Most new injuries occur in young people, and approximately 75% occur in men (Farry & Baxter, 2010). Given that young men acquire the greatest number of SCIs (Farry & Baxter, 2010) and that psychosocial difficulties are a concern in SCIs, understanding the factors that relate to men’s recovery from an SCI is important. The literature on men with an SCI focuses primarily on issues related to the body, including sexuality, functional independence, and sport (Sakellariou, 2006; Sakellariou & Sawada, 2006; Smith & Sparkes, 2005). A number of studies report the impact of SCI on quality of life and/or adaptation needed following an SCI (Manns & Chad, 2001; Renwick, Nourhaghighi, Manns, & Rudman, 2003; Song, 2005). However, what is absent from most of the literature on SCI is the impact of staring by others and how individuals with SCI negotiate the staring in their lives following their acquired injuries.
Staring has garnered some attention in the social psychology, optometry, and disability literatures (Galvin, 2005; Garland-Thomson, 2006, 2009; Groffman, 1998; Langer et al., 1976; Lawrence, Fauerbach, Heinberg, Doctor, & Thombs, 2006). In these literatures, authors report that staring has discomforting and stigmatizing effects on individuals with visible disabilities (e.g., facial disfigurement, amputations, orthopedic deformities, and impairments). Given these consequences, understanding the experiences of men living with SCI with respect to staring will contribute to the visible difference literature but also to the growing literature of disability self-representation and the agency of disabled people in staring encounters. Therefore, the purpose of this article is to examine the perceptions of men living with an acquired SCI regarding the meanings they attribute to staring by others, the consequences for them, and the different strategies men use to respond to staring encounters. These findings are important to educate men living with acquired SCI as it will support the transition from the clinical setting back into their community and public life.
Conceptual Orientation
The analysis for this article has been informed by Goffman’s concept of stigma (1963) and his work on the presentation of self in everyday life (1959) as well as Garland-Thomson’s (2009) concept of staring. Specifically, Goffman’s seminal ideas are integrated into Garland-Thomson’s (2009) conceptual work on staring and starer/staree interactions. In an “ableist” society that treats nondisabled individuals as the standard of “normal living,” an individual with a visible impairment invites staring (Garland-Thomson, 2009). In addition, staring frames the relationship between disabled and nondisabled individuals (Garland-Thomson, 2006). In a staring encounter, the starer stigmatizes or others the staree and by this act can exclude him or her from society (Goffman, 1963). However, the staree can actively promote or perform a particular image or self in the context of staring. In this way, the staree can mitigate, refute, or reframe or push back against these encounters (Goffman, 1959). Garland-Thomson extends these ideas in her work on staring.
Garland-Thomson (2009) proposes that staring is a complicated social interaction which is meaningful, embarrassing, and intimate for both starer and staree. People tend to stare at things that are different and unusual. Being stared at can be experienced as stigmatizing and objectifying and experienced as a loss of power and a reminder that one’s body is different from dominant normative standards. According to Garland-Thomson (2009) staring also has the power to generate positive opportunities and interactions. People who are stared at often can become accomplished starees and can develop a repertoire of responses to others’ acts of staring. Accomplished starees can push back against the negative connotations of a stare through resistive practices of ignoring, staring back, and presenting self in ways to counter the stigmatizing gaze. Thus, being stared at can be turned into an opportunity for the staree to teach and inform others. Garland-Thomson’s (2006, 2009) conceptual framework allows for understanding staring as a complex social interaction that has the power to generate a wide range of experiences and consequences for the starer and the staree.
Method
The Original Study
This research was a conducted as a secondary analysis of data from a larger qualitative study of social adaptation and views of self for community-dwelling adults with acquired SCI (Renwick et al., 2004; Yoshida et al., 2015). The original study employed a cross-sectional and retrospective approach. The larger study included 80 participants, 16 (20%) women and 64 (80%) men with complete or incomplete paraplegia or quadriplegia living in five regions of Ontario (London, Toronto, Barrie, Thunder Bay, and Ottawa/Kingston), Canada’s most populous province. Other inclusion criteria required that participants be 18 years or older, have completed initial rehabilitation at least 3 years ago, and be able to communicate in the English language. Recruitment was carried out through Ontario divisions of Independent Living Resource Centers and the Canadian Paraplegic Association as well through several community organizations supporting consumers with SCI. Ethics approval for all procedures and materials for the original study and any secondary analyses was obtained from the University of Toronto Health Sciences Research Ethics Board prior to conducting the research.
After written informed consent was obtained from the participants, in-home, audiotaped, semistructured interviews (2-3 hours long) were completed by trained interviewers. Questions and probes focused on such topics as a description of the participant’s life before and after SCI and particular events, situations, and experiences that have had impact on the participant. One recurring issue for the male participants in this study was the staring encounters they experienced. Conducting an analysis of the staring accounts within these interviews was important as the original study was focused on how the rehabilitation process helped or hindered participants living with SCI to get on with life postrehabilitation. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and entered into Ethnograph, a qualitative data management software program (Seidel, Kjoiseth, & Seymour, 1998).
The research inquiry is from a constructivist standpoint. This approach emphasizes that analysis is interpretive, from multiple viewpoints, and context must be considered. A modified grounded theory method approach was used in the analysis. A coding scheme, consisting of descriptive codes, was developed from a subset of the interviews and applied to the rest of the interview data. These descriptive codes allowed for the building of a middle-range substantive theory or framework to explain phenomena in the data. For an example of this, see Chau et al. (2008) in which a framework was developed for how women living with SCI developed comfort with their changed bodies.
Secondary Analysis
The research reported here explored the perceptions of these men regarding the impact of staring and their responses to staring. Coded segments in which staring and being stared at were discussed and/or named, were extracted from the original study data. For example, coded interview segments such as “Shock People,” “Negative-Social,” and “Barriers” included content on staring. These segments, drawn from interviews with 30 male participants, had not been previously analyzed in depth. The following questions guided the secondary analysis: How do men with an acquired SCI describe the meaning of staring? What are the social consequences of staring to them? How did participants respond to staring?
The first three authors read all of the complete interviews for participants to understand the context of the segments extracted for secondary analysis. The third author carried out the secondary analysis in ongoing consultation with and under the supervision of the first two authors. Modified grounded theory method principles of conducting constant comparison, within and across interviews, writing memos, developing new subcodes, and then refining and reintegrating codes to identify concepts were used (Charmaz, 2006). In this secondary analysis, new subcodes were developed that were congruent with the questions that guided this analysis. What is produced is an in-depth description of staring and its consequences for this study group of male participants with SCI.
Trustworthiness
Several strategies adopted throughout the secondary analysis process contributed to trustworthiness of the data. The third author kept a reflexive journal throughout the research process (Erlandson, Harris, Skipper, & Allen, 1993). Journaling allowed the third author to consider different possible interpretations and/or how her own perspective entered the analysis. This transparency was important for discussions about data analysis. The first three authors independently reviewed the same data segments related to staring and through in-person discussion, reached consensus on a new subcodes and integration of codes to categories (Heaton, 2004). Finally, the first three authors thoroughly discussed and agreed on the interpretation of the findings in the context of the study in a series of in-person meetings.
Findings
The descriptive characteristics of the 30 male participants included in the secondary analysis are presented in Table 1. Authors’ analysis revealed three overarching themes that reflected the staring encounters of participants: meanings of staring, consequences of staring, and responses to staring. Meaning of staring refers to how the participant perceives the starer’s intent. The consequence of staring refers to the outcome/result or consequence to the staree or participant. In their responses to staring, participants demonstrate the ways in which they engage with the starer in order to deal with the staring encounter. The findings in this section demonstrate Garland-Thomson’s (2006, 2009) approach that staring can have positive generative elements for both the staree and starer. Examples of verbatim quotes are used to demonstrate the major themes. Pseudoymns are used to accompany the quotes. Quotes are punctuated using the following conventions: (a) two dots ( . . ) indicates a pause in speech, (b) three dots ( . . . ) indicates the omission of words not skipping over punctuation, and (c) four dots ( . . . . ) indicates that omitted material includes punctuation (Yoshida, 1991).
Characteristics of Participants.
Meaning of Staring for Men With SCI
Staring had several definitions and meanings for participants. They used language, such as “gawk” to convey the intrusiveness of a stare, and “sit and stare” to describe the deliberate quality of staring. The men spoke of receiving “double looks,” “strange looks,” and “stupid looks.” They also referred to being “looked down upon” and “looked at differently.” While participants used different words with respect to staring, these words conveyed a common experience and shared meaning of being devalued by others. More than just a casual glance or fleeting look, staring was seen as an aggressive form of looking that was both sustained and loaded with meaning. The meaning of a stare was largely determined by the participant’s assessment of the starer’s attitudes, motivations, and intentions. For example, Christopher described how he would interpret what type of message a starer was communicating:
But as far as the people that kind of give you the sideways look and don’t know how to look, I can sort of decipher for myself the ones that were looking out of curiosity and the ones that were just the kind of looking to look.
Most participants portrayed staring as an unwanted and highly injurious behavior because it shaped their early experiences of themselves after their injuries. In addition to feelings of devaluation, staring also made the starer feel dehumanized. For example, Gene commented about his stay in a rehabilitation hospital, “And humanization, like . . . you weren’t a human being anymore. Like looking at my penis or looking at my ass or looking at my face, it’s all the same thing.”
Julian also recounted an experience with staring that made him feel objectified and as though his personal privacy was invaded. He explained what occurred when he reluctantly agreed to allow students to come into his hospital room for a learning experience:
Just having people stare at you when you’re in that kind of a situation. You’re not even familiar with your body anymore and you got these people staring at you. You don’t even know who you are anymore because it is, it totally changes you from what you were to what you are and people look at you that way too . . . They may say they don’t, but they do. You see it everywhere.
Gene’s and Julian’s responses illustrate the dehumanizing effects of staring for these men. In Gene’s account, he is dehumanized as he is seen as not a person but as body parts only to be examined. In Julian’s account, he is dehumanized as he is seen as other than how he sees himself. He sees how others look at him and that they see him in a particular way, which is not how he sees himself.
Consequences of Staring for the Men With SCI Being Stared at
The consequences of staring commonly included feeling cast out or excluded from participating in society. Participants also identified the specific contexts in which this occurred.
Feelings of Exclusion
John described his transition from the rehabilitation hospital to the community as follows:
For the most part, you’re in a cocoon, a societal cocoon. And in that society, everybody, pretty much everyone, is just like you, so you never . . . get looked down upon by anybody until you step out to the real world and you got these strangers looking at you, staring at you.
Dustin stated his similar observations:
Everything changes, you know, all of your perceptions and . . . the way people perceive you and the way you’re . . . your whole—the way you fit into the world is just changed completely, you know.
The looks participants received played an influential role in their feelings of being scrutinized. Terence articulated how assumptions made, based on his visible impairment, excluded him from being considered as a potential employee:
Things that . . . are difficult for a person with a spinal cord injury to deal with post accident . . . or even post rehab is employment. There are not a lot of things that I can’t do. I got a good head on my shoulders. I . . . got a good brain in my head. I’m capable of doing quite a few things. The problem is, of course, that I don’t believe I’m going to get a fair shake. You know . . . one look at a person in a wheelchair and somebody starts thinking “Well can they do this? Should I hire them? . . . And that’s just . . . it’s a stereotype . . . it’s a person’s belief and that actually was my own boss right now who has one arm, wondered if I could do the job.”
Being stared at, along with environmental barriers, and decreased social opportunities were frequently reported reasons why some participants engaged less often in activities outside of the home, which was a consequence of staring. Allen explained that the combination of his physical limitations and people’s negative attitudes and beliefs impeded his participation:
I refuse to do an awful lot of stuff because my disability won’t allow me to do it and society doesn’t like disabled people in general . . . I have a lot of personal issues that I have to deal with, which I still can’t get over.
Exclusionary Contexts: Built Environment and Nondisabled Adults Who Stare
Participants reported two main circumstances in the community that influenced their perceptions of staring as a particularly distressing exclusionary encounter, specifically when the physical environment created a disadvantage and when adults stared. Heavy doors that were difficult to open and curbs that were difficult to climb were commonly reported barriers encountered in the community. Struggling physically with these barriers in public was often something that participants said emphasized their disability, and therefore, attracted people’s stares. Warren recalled in his experiences with navigating the sidewalk in his wheelchair and the negative staring it evoked in others:
Um and I couldn’t push outside . . . without an enormous struggle . . . The sidewalks all sloped towards the street so water can drain into the street. . . . It also tends to pull your chair off in that direction. So I spent my whole time, if I was gonna try and go anywhere by myself outside, hugging the wall with one hand on the wall and the other trying to stay on the sidewalk. It was retarded, ridiculous and . . . I felt entirely self-conscious about that.
The men more often described staring as a negative experience when the staring originated from adults. Adults caused distress because their stares were perceived to be saturated with judgment and discrimination. The participants talked about a number of disrespectful things adults did to them, suggesting that these events perpetuated the participants’ negative views about adults who stared. Don recalled an incident in a parking lot when a man, without subtlety, looked back toward his “fancy car” to check whether or not it had been scratched by his wheelchair. Don stated:
That kind of people in society I could care less about . . . . They make me pissed off that there’s a part of society that doesn’t give two cents about anybody else. It’s myself, me, and only me kind of thing.
The participants spoke of the difference between children and adult starers. They believed children’s stares were expressions of curiosity and interest, which made it easier to understand and accept. For example, David drew a comparison between the motivations of children and adults when he stated: “And kids are better at being more open and they’ll ask a question, and as long as they get their answer, they’re satisfied. But the parents, grab them, take them away, like you got a disease.”
Responding to Staring by Men With SCI
Participants responded to staring in a variety of ways: minimizing of feelings or ignoring the staring, confronting the staring, and presenting self in ways that countered the stigmatizing gaze and/or educated the starer.
Minimizing of Feelings or Ignoring
Pretending that staring did not bother them is another example of what the participants did in response to staring. Albert explained that a strategy he adopted early on after his injury was to deny that it was happening. He stated:
The first time, if there was like a stare . . . you could tell if somebody was talking . . . I kind of pretended it never happened . . . I didn’t say anything . . . I didn’t want to hear it.
Julian described how he gave other people the impression that he was unaffected by staring:
I put on a happy face. I still do . . . like I pretend I’m happy when I’m not. I don’t do it all the time, but I do it . . . Yeah, that’s how I coped with it. Just try to make everybody else feel good.
Confronting the Staring
In contrast to other reactions to staring, such as staying home or ignoring feelings, some participants engaged in confrontational actions that resisted staring. Some men reported that they would speak to the person staring at them in an effort to “cut them off” and end the staring. Christopher described how he stared back during an encounter with staring:
The first time I went out . . . I think I was in front of a store . . . and there was some girl or guy who was in the window and he kept staring. Every time I looked, he looked away so I finally went right up to the window and I just started staring at him. And he looked at me like “What the hell are you doing this?” Well, “Why are you staring at me” and he kind of got the point.
This passage highlights the discomfort that might be experienced by both the starer and the staree in a staring encounter. It also points to the power and control inherent in staring: When the staree takes charge in the situation, he attempts to regain control which he feels is being threatened. The result of this type of confrontational encounter is more likely to be anger and negative perceptions for the starer and the staree rather than an opportunity for mutual understanding.
Understanding and Countering the Stare
Moving toward understanding staring meant that participants learned to “live with” staring. Learning to “live with” staring typically involved an awareness of the attitudes, motivations, and intentions underlying a stare, but also the ability to distance oneself from the experience. Participants often spoke about being uncomfortable with staring in the early stages after SCI. However, in time, some participants became desensitized to staring, as exemplified by Arthur’s comment:
Well, now . . . I just don’t concern myself with what other people think at all. When I’m walking or whatever and stuff and I am just so used to the people looking and staring. Let them wonder . . . it doesn’t bother me anymore. Done it. It really did, like at first, like I said, probably for a couple of years.
Early exposure to the public during rehabilitation through trips to the community was something many participants described as helping them adjust to staring. For example, Michael stated: “Even going down to the mall and have coffee, just so you get used to . . . people looking at you, cause you’re a little different now. You’re a little shorter.” Another approach that participants indicated was helpful in becoming more comfortable with staring was the public’s increased exposure to individuals with visible impairments and issues of accessibility. Gene’s response summed it up:
In those days . . . a small community . . . maybe a population of 45,000 to 50,000 . . . back then people used to just gawk at me in a wheelchair. And . . . it’s just amazing . . . how ignorant some people can be. And when I say ignorant, I say they had . . . no understanding. It’s not like today where you see oodles and oodles of people in wheelchairs, from various disabilities.
Justin shared his observations about how “times have changed”:
I think people are so accepting in this day and age. Like there’s lots of support out there, so it’s so much easier. When I was a child, people in a wheelchair were stuck in their room. There were people in my village in wheelchairs, and we never ever saw them outside. They couldn’t go out. But here, . . . access is everywhere . . . the malls and government buildings and peoples’ awareness.
Moving toward understanding also meant reflecting on and attempting to understand the perspective of the person staring. Putting themselves in the position of the starer made some participants realize that, prior to SCI, they might have reacted the same way toward someone in a wheelchair. For example, Tom commented:
I knew one person in a wheelchair, so I didn’t know what a spinal cord injury was. So I thought . . . I don’t remember people staring at me but I guess I kind of thought well, if we would switch roles, I’d probably stare too. I’d be very curious. I’d say, “Oh, the poor boy. What happened to him?”
A common thread in participants’ experiences was interpreting staring by others as an outward expression of interest and curiosity. This perception increased the level of personal comfort with staring for many participants.
As participants became more comfortable with staring, some engaged the starer(s) intentionally by projecting a positive image of self and encouraging others’ awareness about their condition. These actions helped the men reduce their discomfort with staring and, in some cases, created opportunities to reframe disability. The men presented a positive image by dressing up nicely, choosing flattering clothes, and staying in shape. These activities influenced their interactions in public. For instance, Lawrence elaborated on a positive self-presentation:
Like if I’m dressed up well, or if I feel good about how I look, . . . then I don’t necessarily find it so hard to be stared at. And you can even sort of brainwash yourself into thinking . . . “Yeah they’re staring at me, but I have my [nice] sweater on.” You know, as opposed to, “They’re staring at me and I got, you know, an old t-shirt on . . . It helps to be in shape. I felt better about myself when I wasn’t overweight.”
Reframing Disability
Reframing disability by projecting a positive image of themselves through the way they used their wheelchairs was another approach that helped participants. Justin talked about how he performed “stunts” and “tricks” in his wheelchair to showcase his abilities and reframe disability for the starer:
Things that I do now just to show off for people, because I’m a bit of a showoff . . . But also it can be good I guess . . . to want to look good and do good and take care of my own self.
Staring was an encounter that some participants recognized as an opportunity to stimulate awareness and change in society. Educating others about their impairments and the equipment they used helped the men transform a potentially discomforting interaction into something constructive. Don explained that when people didn’t know how to approach him in public and he saw them staring at him, he made an effort to help them interact with him. He described his proactive approach, as follows:
You’re gonna see lots of kids. They’ll be looking back as they’re walking away. They want to see you go in your wheelchair up on that lift. Go on the elevator, go on the ramp. They want to see all of that. Take your time . . . make a nice show of it. Making everything right. Let them see what they want to see. If they stand there, talk to them . . . Explain it to them, so . . . they get a better light of it. Hence [it] come[s] that when they’re out and about they’ll feel free to ask people about it . . . Sit there and talk to them about it.
Don also talked about another situation in which he initiated eye contact when holding a door open for a nondisabled person.
I would make [a] point of standing and holding the door open for the guy walking behind me because he may be 20 feet behind me. So I’d kind of lean there and hold the door open for him for a change because they’re always holding doors for us guys. That starts, “Thank you very much for holding the door.” “Well anytime” kind of a thing . . . And I think it actually lifts them so they can . . . [make] eye contact with you, which gives them the impression that you’re not much different than they are except you’ve got a wheelchair and they don’t kind of thing.
In this encounter, Don subverted the starer/staree interaction by “turning the tables” by holding the door for the nondisabled person. In this way, the potential starer became the assisted person and experiences the staree’s position in this interaction. Thus, this act by the participant signaled that the people with disabilities are like any other person.
In summary, as participants became more comfortable with staring, they took up ways to put themselves in a positive light, by reframing the staring and using the staring interactions to engage with others.
Discussion
This research is significant because it contributes a more complex understanding of the process of staring as experienced by men who have sustained an SCI. Staring can generate moments of discomfort—devaluing and excluding others. However, these encounters can generate varied responses by the staree to the starer. The analysis in this article offers support for Garland-Thomson’s (2006, 2009) conceptualization about staring as having the potential to have a positive impact on starees who are physically different (i.e., have impairment) and may even engender positive opportunities for such starees to take control and proactively reshape the nature of the interaction with the starer. In this study, some participants could tolerate staring soon after acquiring SCI. Others, however, who experienced devaluation and dehumanization through staring, came to do so over time. Often the early accounts of staring occurred within a medical/rehabilitation context. Thus, it is instructive for health care professionals to understand the meaning of staring to their SCI clients and try to mitigate its effects. For those men who later experienced comfort with staring, some recognized the sense of responsibility to educate starers and to increase the public’s comfort with encountering people living with SCI. For them, shaping society’s awareness about disability was portrayed as a positive opportunity that arose from acquiring an SCI. A number of studies have reported that people living with SCI believed their lives had improved since their injury (Manns & Chad, 2001; Weiztner et al., 2011). More studies are needed to understand the positive impact on life with a disability. The current findings point to the importance of studying such positive implications of disability to illuminate how best to foster a sense of hope for the future for people who acquire SCI (Yoshida et al., 2015).
Staring made some participants feel shunned and cast out of society. Such negative effects of staring have been supported in the literature. For instance, the study by Galvin (2005), which explored disabled identity from the perspectives of 92 people with varying disabilities reported that staring in public contributed to the participants’ feelings of rejection by society and their development of negative self-perceptions. Social isolation was one response to staring shared by numerous participants in the secondary analysis reported here. It has also been documented by other authors who have explored social reactions to facial appearance and disfigurement (Bull & Rumsey, 1988; Partridge & Robinson, 1995).
There were no major differences in participants’ responses based on injury type (paraplegic vs. quadriplegia), age at time of injury, time elapsed since initial rehabilitation, and location of residence (urban vs. rural) for this sample group of men. The primary limitation of the current study was that the interview questions used in the primary study were not focused specifically on the men’s experiences with staring after they acquired SCI. Therefore, although the meaning of staring for men with SCIs has been illuminated here in terms of important related themes, further research is needed to understand additional complexities of staring and individuals’ unique experiences with staring. In addition, as this was a Canadian study, this analysis may not be applicable to other contexts. Future qualitative studies could include interview questions specific to experiences with staring to reveal the powerful effects of this social behavior in more depth for people with acquired SCI and other types of visible impairments. For example, future studies on staring could examine its effects within the context of medical and rehabilitation settings and how it would shape patients’ recovery. Future research should include more people living with other embodied differences (e.g., people who use prostheses, facial differences, etc.). Gender differences in staring would also be an important area of study. Finally, examining staring in the context of ethnicity and disability would broaden our understanding to how various social–cultural practices of interactions may influence meanings of disability and staring.
Conclusion
This research contributes to a greater understanding of the meaning that men with an acquired SCI attribute to staring and the dynamics of the starer–staree encounter. The dynamics of the starer–staree interaction has been conceptualized using both Goffman’s (1959, 1963) concepts of stigma and performance of self in daily life and Garland-Thomson’s (2009) view that the staring encounter of the starer–staree may have consequences for both parties. Starees may engage in a myriad of practices to mitigate, resist, and/or to reframe the staring encounter. In addition, the encounter may generate opportunities for positive interactions (Garland-Thomson, 2009). Given this approach, the findings illustrates a more complex and nuanced understanding of the “stigmatizing” staring encounters for the staree and starer and movethis interaction toward more liberating and positive possibilities. The article is highly relevant for those living with visible differences, their supporters, the general public, and health professionals who seek to support clients through the SCI rehabilitation process.
Recommendations reported by participants in this research themselves included community visits early on in the SCI rehabilitation process, with opportunities to debrief about the experience with professionals as well as with experienced peers who have been living with SCI for some time. This kind of approach would allow individuals with recently acquired SCI to experience reactions by the general public, including staring, while being supported by professionals and community-dwelling peers with SCI who are experienced with staring. As a result, men living with a new SCI will benefit from the experiences of others which may assist with reintegration back into their communities. If men feel empowered in their new bodies, they might also help shape positive perceptions in society about individuals with visible impairments, such as SCI.
Footnotes
Acknowledgements
The participants in the original study are gratefully acknowledged for their generosity in taking the time to share their own perceptions and experiences with us.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This research was supported by funding from the Ontario Neurotrauma Foundation (Grant #ONBO-00021).