Although Western Tradition has placed the classical works of Ancient Greek and Roman philosophers at the forefront of rhetorical study, I have learned over the course of my undergraduate career that rhetoric extends beyond the definition I was originally taught to rely on. Through a series of readings, I have uncovered a newfound approach to both practicing and recognizing rhetorics. For the purposes of this essay, it is vital to possess a basic definition for rhetorical action.
Gerard A. Hauser, Professor Emeritus of Rhetoric at the University of Boulder defines rhetoric in his textbook Introduction to Rhetorical Theory as: “-an instrumental use of language. One person engages another person in an exchange of symbols to accomplish some goal. It is not communication for communication’s sake. Rhetoric is communication that attempts to coordinate social action…Its goal is to influence human choices on specific matters that require immediate attention,” (3). I have discovered that rhetoric takes on new contours in light of one’s lived experience, and I myself have embarked on my own rhetorical renaissance.
There were two particular readings in my undergraduate career that took an accepted definition of rhetoric and built upon it in ways I admire. Both authors’ experiences live up to Hauser’s baseline definition, but with an atypical twist. M. Remi Yergeau’s Occupying Autism: Rhetoric, Involuntarity, and the Meaning of Autistic Lives and Legacy Russell’s Glitch Feminism: A Manifesto have re-fashioned my conceptualization of rhetoric for the better.
My own experience in academia has been overwhelmingly Western, to say the least. Even within an English or literature studies class, any focus of non-white and/or non-Western viewpoints and concepts were consistently pushed to the side. During my high school studies, I cannot recall ever giving the deserved time to studying “foreign” viewpoints regarding philosophy or history. While the opportunity to study rhetoric at a classical high school was highly enriching, I had no idea just how incomplete my conceptualization of rhetoric was until taking this class. One particular reading that struck me deeply and truly recalibrated by definition of rhetoric is M. Remi Yergeau’s Occupying Autism. Authored by a self-described “autistic academic”, Yergeau is an associate English professor at the University of Michigan specializing in disability studies, queer rhetorics, and theories of mind. Quite frankly, the notion of autistic rhetoric is not one that I had ever considered. As such, the viewpoints posited by Yergeau in this essay facilitated my own growth on this topic. As someone who has autistic family members, I had always assumed I was fully knowledgeable on the topic and had little left to learn. Upon reading this work, I realized how severely I misunderstood the inherent narrativity of autism.
Additionally, Glitch Feminism by Legacy Russell fostered a newfound appreciation for the internet, despite its blaring issues. To utilize the digital era as a tool for expressing identity is a recent development in human history, and has provided safe spaces for people of all identities to flourish in a found community. This greater focus on a tailored community is a shift from the traditional conception of rhetoric that relies on collective understanding of shared experience. Alternatively, the works of both Yergeau and Russell rely on the understanding of rhetoric as a means of unveiling personal truths that have long been opaque to the world. Sophia Lyon, an academic commentator at UC Santa Barbara asserts that “Western culture does not describe any specific group or belief, but instead it describes tendencies within cultural thought and practices.” In brief, these readings offer nuanced insight into a particular identity, while the vast majority of traditional rhetoric I used to subscribe to is more vague and general in application. Within the selected readings for this reflection, the relationship between the individual and the collective is reassessed within the traditional rhetorical framework. Neurodivergent rhetoric and the expression of marginalized groups are topics that will be analyzed for their impact on my preconceived ideas of rhetoric, and how their approaches of practicing rhetoric can strengthen our society.
Within the anecdotes and memorable analogies of Yergeau’s Occupying Autism, there stands a daunting question: what is the baseline capacity for practicing rhetoric? As the title suggests, Yergeau spends the essay illustrating the inherent rhetoric ingrained within the autistic life and refutes the modern pathologization of autism, stating: “Popular autism discourse resembles an epidemic more than does autism,” (84). Neurotypical prejudices regarding autism involve the belief that autism necessitates an incapacity for emotion, personhood, and constructing and understanding stories – all vital components within the traditional definition of rhetoric.
For too long the diagnosis of autism, particularly when made during childhood, has conjured imagery of kidnapping and general tragedy. Recalling an infamous ad from the autism advocacy group “Autism Speaks” aired in 2008, Yergeau shares how the narrator of the ominous commercial assumes the anthropomorphized role of autism itself, and claims that it works faster than pediatric cancer, AIDS, or even a car crash. This intense pathologization of autism strives to sever an autistic person from full personhood, refusing that autism is merely a difference but is rather a cruel deficit.
In further assessing the imposed and unwarranted divorce between autism and rhetorical capabilities, Yergeau posits: “Autism research traffics in myths. It presupposes body-mind dualism. It collapses ideas about choice, agency, voluntary action, willfulness, and consciousness into tidy bifurcations that don’t exist for anyone ever,” (93). Refuting this notion, Yergeau continues: “Using such logic, a person does not occupy autism; rather, autism occupies a person,” (94). Given the wide acceptance of this viewpoint at the time, it is easy to understand why the Autism Speaks commercial chose such an extreme stance when conveying their message.
Media is an indicator of cultural viewpoints, and autistic representation in the media has evolved over time, mostly for the better. However, the inaccurate representations have undermined autistic perspectives, prompting people like Yergeau to take a stand on the slights made against them. The shedding of negative stereotypes has been a slow process, but they are reflecting changing societal perspectives and a growing awareness of neurodiversity. In the past, depictions often leaned towards stereotypes, portraying autistic people as socially isolated and lacking emotional depth. These portrayals perpetuated misconceptions about autism spectrum disorders, reinforcing stigmas and hindering a nuanced understanding of the diverse experiences within the autistic community.
Throughout their life, Yergeau describes how their interests and actions have always been written off as merely symptoms of autism, rather than just how they express themselves. Their obsession with maps and certain music was given a stamp of “perseverations;” their repetition of lines from a favorite movie deemed “echolalia.” Voicing their warranted frustrations, Yergeau states: “My very being became a story, a text in dire need of professional analysis,” (83). Yergeau makes the case that the stimming and ticking associated with autism is inherently rhetorical. However, these actions are often discredited within the context of neurotypical communication. Previously I have seen stimming and ticcing as only a symptom of autism. Now it is clear to me that the physicality of these actions are merely different manifestations of feelings and desires. Since stims and ticcs are an exchange of symbols and are instruments for autistic communication, it then follows that autistic people certainly have the capacity for rhetoric, despite atypical manifestations.
As a whole, the internet is a platform unlike anything humanity has encountered. The ability for individuals to say, see, and do whatever they desire (within the confines of the digital world) is a risky ability with endless potential for discrimination and harassment. Nevertheless, Legacy Russell argues that the internet is a valuable vessel for expression utilized by marginalized groups. In Glitch Feminism: A Manifesto, she describes her online presence as a catharsis; something that chipped away at the isolation she felt from being the only black, female identifying, femme, and queer person in her vicinity when she lived on the Lower East Side in New York City. The overall message of the work encourages readers to reconsider the glitches in both digital systems and societal structures, viewing them not as malfunctions to be fixed but as opportunities for rebellion and transformation. The manifesto challenges notions of identity and power rooted in tradition and calls for a more expansive and diverse understanding of feminism in the digital age. In short, “-the glitch creates a fissure within which new possibilities of being and becoming manifest.” (17).
In a rhetorical sense, glitch feminism employs deeply personal tactics. The speaker has the ability to communicate to a chosen audience based on how they identify. If a queer person wishes to express the highs and lows of their experiences, modern online forums and other media can create a tailored community group of those with similar identities. Nevertheless, anyone can see almost everything on the internet. There are no perfectly safe spaces without risk of threats from dissenters or extremists. Social media platforms can contribute to feelings of inadequacy and lower self-esteem as people compare their shortcomings to curated online personas. On the other side of the same coin, people can curate the online communities they choose to be a part of.
Glitch feminism aims to dismantle oppressive digital and societal structures in order to rebuild a more inclusive and equitable future. The digital realm provides a place for this glitch to mutate and take on new strength while exploring the complexities of gender, with Russell stating: “It creates a homeland for those traversing the complex channels of gender’s diaspora. The glitch is for those selves joyfully immersed in the in-between, those who have traveled away from their assigned site of gendered origin,” (16).
Despite any onslaught of incels and online opposition, glitch feminism still simultaneously fosters both individual and communal growth and facilitates the reconciliation of identity conflicts. Knowing that there are others like you, even if you don’t encounter them in your day-to-day life, alleviates the “othering” feeling that puts mental health at great risk. The glitch, rather than being a flaw in the code to be corrected, is seen as a force that fearlessly challenges the norm. It will multiply and spread, but not like a virus; it will reach those who need it. Russell investigates how glitch feminism denies conformity to the status quo, and embraces the differences and dissonances, creating a space for voices that have been silenced for too long.
Aristotle once wrote that rhetoric involves harnessing the available means of persuasion, (Rapp 1). I have come to see that, while it has evolved, the heart of rhetoric is still persuasion. Based on these deeply personal writings, I’ve concluded that Yergeau and Russell are persuading readers (and the world in general) to view their identities with equivalent respect and nuance. In brief, rhetoric plays a fundamental role in sustaining a functional society by being a powerful tool for communication, persuasion, and the construction of both shared and individual meaning.
Delaney Bridges 
Leave a comment