Comparison Between 'Toxicity And The Consuming Subject'

Toxicity and the Consuming Subject by Nan Enstad and The Social Construction of Disability by Susan Wendell are two compelling texts that explore the intersection of culture, society, and the human body. Both authors use a critical lens to examine how different social and cultural norms shape the way people experience their bodies and how they are perceived by others. Both Enstad and Wendell use compelling evidence to drive their point and convince their readers that there must be something done. Enstad uses more relatable and intriguing evidence to draw the reader into what she is saying, while Wendell uses more straightforward and bland evidence to make her point more credible to the reader.
In Toxicity and the Consuming Subject, Enstad

She argues that disability is not a natural aspect of the human body, but rather a socially and culturally created concept. Wendell gives the example of “ many women with disabilities are discouraged from having children because other people can only imagine caring for children in ways that are impossible for women with their disabilities” ( Wendell 39). She gives this example of people who have to resort to different ways of having children. This example gives the reader a good idea of one of the ways that people might be envisioned to have a disability. These examples also give the reader a great way to correlate what the reader is saying and give them a deeper understanding of what the author is trying to get across. Wendell and Enstad both do a great job at this as they both give examples of how people are disadvantaged in society. Even though Enstad and Wendell have similarities in using evidence to help their claim, there are also some

She uses many different theories and studies done by highly educated individuals to get her point across. For example, “ Medical sociologist Arthur Frank argues that we, as a society, need to hear the stories of ill people, precisely because so many of them are rejecting modern notions of the body and are, therefore, theorizing “post-modern times” through the telling of their own experiences” (Enstad 64). As we can see through this example she uses a more intellectual insight to her claim. This gives the reader a sense of trust that the author knows what she is talking about and makes them trust what she is saying. By including evidence like this, it lets the author have their evidence speak for itself without much explanation. This is different from what Wendell uses as she uses more inviting and understanding evidence to get her point