Earlier this month Kylie Simmons was detained at the Atlanta International Airport when a customs agent reported her dysfluent speech as suspicious. Customs agents accused Simmons of dishonesty based on her speech when responding to questions, and also of lying about being dysfluent.

Simmons’ treatment by customs enforcement is rooted in the misconception that stuttering is indicative of dishonesty and non-compliance, but is also influenced by institutional racism. An intersectional analysis of this incident must acknowledge the key differences in the experiences of white dysfluent people and dysfluent people of color.

Customs enforcement, the TSA, and regional transit security organizations are agents of state-sanctioned violence against bodies they deem suspicious based on appearance, movement, and communication. Most commonly these are people of color, trans people, disabled people, immigrants, and non-native English speakers. With the justification of promoting national security, law enforcement detains, injures, and kills people perceived as suspicious. In responding to incidents such as the treatment of Kylie Simmons, it is critical to examine not only Simmons’ unequal treatment but also the role of race and disability working together in the state’s policing of its citizens.

The fear of suspicious bodies and their threat to national security is spread through “See Something, Say Something” campaigns, which encourage citizens to police each other in transit and other public spaces. These campaigns are effective in maintaining a continuous state of fear, and an understanding that it is one’s civic duty to scrutinize the actions of others in order to prevent acts of terrorism.

As a disabled, gender nonconforming person who travels often with various mobility aids and medical devices, I have experienced ableism in navigating transit systems including the TSA and customs enforcement. However, when I share my stories of discrimination, it is from a place of racial privilege. As a white person, I can speak out on police brutality with relative confidence that I will not be arrested or killed for being perceived as suspicious, and that neither national security nor the suspiciousness of my body will be used to justify my death at the hands of the state.

In responding to Simmons’ treatment, I am calling for more than awareness about stuttering, or different training for airport staff. Simple outrage at this incident reveals privilege--since such discrimination happens all the time to racialized bodies that appear non-compliant. In solidarity with Black Lives Matter, I am calling for the abolition of customs enforcement, and an end to the state-sanctioned violence against suspicious bodies.

-Erin

Earlier this month I went on a stuttering pilgrimage to Laughlin, Nevada to a smoke-filled casino to eat cheap buffets and see stuttering idol/country singer Mel Tillis. When picking up my tickets, I saw a sign reading, “Mel Tillis press conference at 2:30.” Having met other important people who were integral in my development as a comedian (Dick Gregory, Joan Rivers, Dave Chapelle, and Janeane Garofalo), I knew I had to meet the man who introduced stuttering to the masses in the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s. Beyond stuttering, he is an amazing singer-songwriter who received the 2012 medal of honor from President Obama. He’s a legend and meant so many things to me. So I attended the press conference. Also, knowing that he was a country singer, I figured he would be warm and accessible—plus, hey! We both stutter!
 
I was correct. He was lovely. At the press conference, I was able to tell him what he meant to me as a person who stutters. I thanked him for stuttering openly at a time when the expectation was not to embrace our divergent speech, but to hide it (video at http://tinyurl.com/hp3hvdb). Throughout the 24 hours I was at the casino, I received hugs from those who heard me testify. One of the hugs came from a woman who had an adult daughter who stuttered. She told me, “When my daughter started stuttering, we told her to slow down. But the speech therapist told us not to do that and just let her talk.” Although we only discussed the advice her daughter received and how she “grew out of her stuttering,” I felt the woman’s spirit and affection toward me. The bond between us was facilitated by Mr. Tillis’ openness about his speech and how it facilitated my own openness. 
 
At the press conference, I noticed Mr. Tillis halting on a sound at the beginning of a sentence and he hit the table. Of course, it was in the context of what he was saying, but I knew it was a secondary (a trick many of us use to get out a word—you should see me make a phone call. I am practically punching out the coffee tables to facilitate my fluency). I practically cried when I saw my own speech patterns reflected in someone I held in such high regard! I got to see Mel Tillis do a secondary, and it was within the first minute of his press conference! Throughout the press conference as well as the show, he stated how his speech has improved and that he found techniques to facilitate fluency. He also talked about Minnie Pearl encouraging him to use his voice (see video: http://tinyurl.com/gpg48ks). When he spoke, I could tell when he was using these tricks. I, of course, didn’t hear fluency; I heard stuttering and I felt like I was home. At the end of the show, I had him sign a T-shirt I bought and reminded him that I was the comedian he met earlier. Again, he was gracious. As I walked away he asked, “Did you notice I didn’t stutter much?” I, of course, longed for the stutter and looked for it the entire time. I replied, “You stuttered enough to show you were legit.”
 
I was pretty gleeful to have gone to the show and had this experience. I even noticed that I started having feelings for Mr. Tillis. That’s right, they were those kinds of feelings. For an older guy he is good looking: he kind of has an Alan Alda thing going on (which Mr. Tillis would probably hate to hear, but in my book, it is a compliment). I don’t usually go for older men, and money and power aren't turn ons for me. (You should see some of the guys I have gone out with to get the full impact of that statement.)
 
So why was I feeling all tingly? Then I remembered how I have felt for the hundreds of stutterers I have met in my life. I was experiencing yet another stuttering crush. A stuttering crush is the loving feeling and admiration/attraction one feels for a fellow Stutterer. It is the feeling of coming home. It is feeling free of isolation in finding people who are like you. Author bell hooks (she doesn’t capitalize her name) talks about this feeling in her book Teaching to Transgress. She introduced me to the Southern saying, “My tongue is in my friend’s mouth,” which works so well on so many levels for this example! For those of us who stutter, we don’t see ourselves reflected in our everyday lives. Our experiences, our dysfluencies, and everything we think and feel is often experienced in isolation. For me, seeing Mr. Tillis talk about his experiences and having these be received by a fluent audience kinda made me cry. He was talking about my experience, and it was being well received. Of course, his coping mechanism about his speech is to have people laugh with him instead of at him. This contrasts my own attitude of laughing at and mocking the people who laugh at me. Perhaps it is a generational thing! Nonetheless, he was speaking part of my experience, which made me love him and gave me tingly stuttering butterflies in my tummy. I was able to identify this feeling because I had already experienced these.
 
I remember crushing on Billy Bibbit in the movie One Flew of the Cuckoos Nest (sadly not the best image for a young person who stutters). I remember crushing on Stuttering John from the Howard Stern show. I remember any given number of crushes on any given number of Stutterers, some who might be reading this now. I know that the next person who stutters that I meet, I might be crushing on them as well. Most of us who stutter are all seventh grade girls when it comes to meeting people who reflect our experiences. Instead of “boy crazy” we are “stutter crazy.” It is the expression of love and community we have for one another. Sometimes it escalates into romance or marriages (we have seen plenty of that at stuttering conferences). Sometimes it simply manifests in the love we have for each other and the need for fellowship. Mel Tillis opened himself up to be a reflection of how I speak and my experiences.  
 
So of course I totally crushed on an 83 year old man. He’s Mel frickin’ Tillis!

-Nina G

​
From January to July 2016 Nina will be donating a portion of her speaking engagements to the National Stuttering Association’s scholarship fund to help pay for individuals to attend the conference. 

On December 25, StutterTalk posted a fantastic podcast, led by their B Team, regarding Did I Stutter. It contained an hour of thoughtful conversation on the four main tenants of Did I Stutter as listed on our front page. I highly recommend listening to the issues discussed, and hope it will lead to even more conversation about disability rights within the stuttering community.

The podcast raised many points worth further discussion (and indeed many that have already been tackled and nuanced on this blog), but one in particular caught my attention as worthy of further comment, since it involved the very heart of what Did I Stutter is about.

The piece of the conversation I want to focus on begins at 4:25 in response to the first point on Did I Stutter’s page, where the readers are put off by Did I Stutter’s bold claim to know what stuttering is. Did I Stutter writes:

“we understand disability and stuttering not as an individual defect, but first and foremost as a social discrimination against certain forms of human speaking.”

By and large, the B Team seems to find this claim and its explanation reductive. Questions are raised about whether focusing on society/ableism discounts the experience and struggle of the person stuttering, the role of internalized ableism, and whether calling stuttering a matter of discrimination is “painting this concept with a wide brush stroke.” Caryn Herring in particular found herself defensive regarding the strength of the claim: “it’s telling me ‘this is what this is, and this is what I should feel.’”

The questions raised are mostly issues this blog has expanded on, and are certainly still open to continued discussion and molding. What struck me in listening, however, was how strongly the Team pushed back against Did I Stutter making a claim to know “what stuttering is.”

It struck me as odd, because I can think of very few stuttering organizations that don’t make a bold claim to know what stuttering is on their websites.

Here’s just a sampling:

• "Stuttering is a communication disorder involving disruptions, or “disfluencies,” in a person’s speech."  National Stuttering Association (NSA)
• "Stuttering affects the fluency of speech. It begins during childhood and, in some cases, lasts throughout life. The disorder is characterized by disruptions in the production of speech sounds, also called ‘disfluencies.’" American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA)
• “Stuttering is a communication disorder in which the flow of speech is broken by repetitions (li-li-like this), prolongations (lllllike this), or abnormal stoppages (no sound) of sounds and syllables.” The Stuttering Foundation
• “Stuttering is a complex communication disorder that affects approximately 1% of the population (over 68 million people) and 3 million Americans.” FRIENDS
• “Stuttering is a complex and often-misunderstood communication disorder that can cause interruptions in a person’s speech.” Stuttering Association for the Young (SAY)

​These are by and large wonderful organizations, and the majority of these definitions go on to discuss not only the various manifestations of stuttered speech (repetitions, prolongations, etc.), but the social and lifestyle impacts of stuttering. My point is simply that every one of them is making a bold truth claim about “what stuttering is.” What’s more, every one of them is agreeing that stuttering is foremost a disorder. Stuttering is being presented outright as a medical/biological/pathological problem contained within an individual’s body. I can’t think of a more direct way of telling a person who stutters what their stutter is and how they should feel about it.

Given this climate, it is no wonder that Did I Stutter’s contrary claim that stuttering is absolutely not a medical or pathological disorder, but is rather a social discrimination, is indeed a new and unique statement. My point is simply that what is new about Did I Stutter’s claim is its content, not the fact that they would boldly claim to know what stuttering is. Indeed, medical professionals, SLPs, self-help organizations and the world at large have been telling us stuttering is a disorder in equally bold terms for all our lives.

Following the disability rights movement and the decades of research it has produced, Did I Stutter is refusing to reduce social differences to medical disorders, or let the language of “conditions” and “pathologies” define how we relate to our bodies. I understand the defensiveness that comes from being told what stuttering is, because it is that same defensiveness that fueled Did I Stutter’s opposing claim. I for one am tired and insulted by hearing stuttering voices referred to as disorders, and am grateful to read stuttering boldly defined as something else entirely. It is time for the world to start accepting that there is truly nothing wrong with stuttering.

-Charis