On February 24, 2020, the #MeToo movement had a victory when Harvey Weinstein was charged with two criminal charges: criminal sexual assault in the first degree and rape in the first degree. My phone exploded from various news companies all posting about this long-coming conviction. However, what really bugged me was that all the photos shown of Weinstein were of him in his walker. Surely, this must be a joke. How can they portray this horrible man like a sad grandpa? What is the point in all of this?
The New York Times posted an op-ed about the “Truth About Harvey Weinstein’s Walker,” discussing the strategic use of the walker to make Weinstein look less threatening. While it is true that Weinstein did have back surgery, the excessive imagery and use of the walker in court can be traced back to a long history of disability as a ploy in the legal field.
As someone who is very interested in both disability advocacy and becoming the next RBG-type legal feminist icon, I was heartbroken but fascinated to learn more about how disability can be used in high-profile cases to make the defendant look more appealing to a jury. It is no secret that people who visibly look crippled might be perceived as harmless. I have even been in situations where I was told I could always get away with murder ~in a hypothetical situation of course~ because I watch a lot of SVU and crime documentaries, and nobody ever expects the girl with the limp. Somewhat flattering as that might be, many lawyers also have the same idea.
With Harvey Weinstein’s case, it was obvious that he was guilty. Whether or not the court was planning on ruling in his favor or not was what kept America on its toes for three years. To be honest, I did not think much about the case until I saw that photo of Weinstein with a walker, smiling at the paparazzi as he remained free from jail until trial. It was that moment when I realized what his team of expensive lawyers were trying to do. They wanted the public to pity him, to forget and forgive his “mistakes”. Surely this man can’t harm anyone, look at how crippled and disabled he is. The media continued to spread this narrative by showing images of him in court, bent over, slowly walking and aids surrounding him to assist. It made me sick to look at. For one, it made it seem like Harvey Weinstein was no longer a threat to society because of his lack of physical strength. Secondly, the constant portrayal of Weinstein’s newfound disability spreads the narrative that disabled people are just like him: crooks who can be sympathized with.
People with disabilities experience a plethora of discrimination in their lives. We are more likely to be overlooked for jobs, marriage and family, and misunderstood within the education system. There are also stereotypes that people with disabilities often use the government to fund their life to continue a lifestyle of laziness. It is simply not true. People who do not fit these stereotypes often don’t receive assistance or are denied their rights to adequate healthcare because of the existing beliefs. Then I see Weinstein and his lawyers using his back surgery to make him seem more sympathetic. I see Robert Gregory Bowers, the Pittsburgh Synagogue shooter — who was shot by police during crossfire — roll up to court in a wheelchair as if to say that he, too, was a victim of the attack. It makes me hurt inside because I know that these cases, high profile and construed throughout mass media, will only hurt society’s portrayal of disabilities.
So the next famous horrible case that involves a person who has a disability, remind yourself that these people are still criminals and us disabled people do not associate ourselves with them. I promise we are super nice and (mostly) not federal criminals.