Depicting Disability on Reality Love TV

"The Undateables"

A second expression of disability that I encountered was the British dating show The Undateables, a reality program that tracks ready-for-love, disabled contestants on dates. A show which featured specifically disabled dating under such an aggressive title naturally evoked strong reactions, from support to ire. Many critics questioned whether the producers were attempting to suggest that disabled people were “undateable” with such a pessimistic title; Channel 4, in response, clarified that “The programme title is intended to challenge preconceptions about disability and we hope that the attention around the series will help stimulate debate around some of the important issues the programme touches on.”[1] Because disability is essential to the narrative of this show (and disability appears in a non-incidentalist manner), The Undateables is an instance of non-incidentalist disability on television. On every episode of the television show, three disabled individuals embark on a date with carefully matched partners.[2] Contestants must be disabled, but this disability can be in the form of a physical impairment or a cognitive/mental disability: “Doctors said its four series have featured people with Down's syndrome, Tourette's syndrome, facial disfigurement and autism among other conditions.”[3]
            Despite the program’s nobly articulated aims, the show serves as little more than ablest fodder. A first episode voice-over announces that, “In the world of matchmaking, people with disabilities can be a hard sell.”[4] While The Undateables claims to challenge the stereotypes which they attribute to “society” and “preconception”, they instead perpetuate the same ablest norms that they purport to destroy. Even if the show’s content had a disability-positive message, which it doesn’t, comedian Lee Ridley points out that the damaging advertising would still outweigh any benefits of actually watching the show. As Ridley points out in his Huffington Post-published attack on the show, the advertising for The Undateables (which he calls, Would You Shag a Crip?) is far more-viewed than the actual program content, so any beneficial effect that someone might derive from viewing the show is far outweighed by the thousands more people who see salacious billboards—“love is blind, disfigured, autistic”—branding disabled people “undateable”. Ridley claims that the “only thing most people will remember is the offensive advertising.”[5] The program has additionally received ire for being segregationist: “let’s try and move things to a place where disabled people star in a dating show alongside non-disabled people, who are all looking for love,” argues one reviewer.[6] In creating a dating show only for disabled participants, many believe that the show perpetuates the “othering” of those with disability instead of normalizing it.
            Yet, others object on the basis that such a program is exploiting those with disabilities. Attendees at the British Medical Association’s yearly meeting expressed concerns that program participants may not be adequately able to consent to participate. Contestants with learning or cognitive disabilities may be incapable of truly understanding the consequences of stardom or fathoming that producers may seek to take advantage of them.[7]
            While most Twitter responses to the show are well-meaning, but condescending sentiments:Alternatively, several individuals made non-legitimate impeachments to the show. These users advertised either themselves or another neurotypical, able-bodied individual as “very special” or with “a mild case of autism” that qualified them for show participation; such jokes rely on disability as the punchline:
Pretending that someone has a disability is a joke made in poor taste. These tweets suggest that there’s something intrinsically humorous about disability or the contestants that qualify for The Undateables. When disability on television is exploited at the expense of ablest entertainment, there will always be a pressing need to improve the way that we represent disability.

Consider the case study of "Sarah Herron on the Bachelor"
Return to "Chapter 2: The Wrong Way"
Continue on to "Chapter 3: Inauthentically"