When Inclusion Has an Asterisk: The Hypocrisy of a Disability Film Festival

(IN BRIEF) The European Film Festival Integration You and Me, which claims to champion disability inclusion, recently disqualified the film Unspoken Truth—a documentary about severe chronic stuttering—on the grounds that the festival did not recognize stuttering as a disability. Despite global organizations like the WHO and the UN classifying this condition as a disability, the festival offered no response or clarification. This action highlights a significant contradiction: while presenting itself as inclusive, the festival is effectively gatekeeping which disabilities are deemed valid. The filmmakers, who hoped to raise awareness about an often overlooked disability, withdrew their film in protest, pointing out that true inclusion does not exclude certain disabilities simply because they are misunderstood or less visible. The incident underscores the broader issue that genuine disability advocacy must recognize and support all disabilities rather than selectively validating only some.

(PRESS RELEASE) HILVERSUM, 4-Mar-2025 — /EuropaWire/ — Film festivals celebrating disability inclusion often pride themselves on amplifying diverse voices, advocating for representation, and fostering understanding. But what happens when that inclusivity comes with an asterisk?

For more than a decade, the European Film Festival Integration You and Me has claimed to pave the way for the topic of disability in the media, culture, and social space. However, despite this claim, the exclusion of people with speech impairments reveals a significant contradiction in their approach to inclusivity.

Recently, the festival found itself at odds with its own goals. Film festivals typically take weeks or even months to carefully curate selections, ensuring that each film is viewed by multiple judges. Unspoken Truth, a film about severe chronic stuttering and the societal limitations faced by those who stutter, was not just passed over but immediately disqualified. Not because of artistic merit, but because the festival did not recognize the condition as a disability. This group, already underrepresented in the media, was notably left out, exposing a gap in the festival’s stated mission.

The filmmakers, who had hoped to highlight an underrepresented disability, reached out to the festival seeking clarification. Their message was simple: if the film had not been selected for artistic reasons, they would have understood. But an outright disqualification on the grounds that the festival refused to acknowledge a globally recognized disability raised serious concerns.

For reference, the filmmakers provided documentation from both the World Health Organization and the United Nations, which clearly classify the condition as a disability. They even attached a news segment from ABC, visually demonstrating the impact of the disability in question. But rather than engage in a meaningful discussion, the festival remained silent. No response. No clarification. Just a quiet, uncomfortable irony hanging in the air.

The contradiction is striking. A festival that champions disability inclusion yet draws an arbitrary line on which disabilities count is not just misleading, it is deeply insulting to the very individuals it claims to support. Maybe the disability in question just isn’t trendy enough for the festival’s version of inclusion, where only certain disabilities get a seat at the table while others are conveniently ignored. By gatekeeping what is and isn’t a disability, the festival undermines its own credibility and mission. True inclusion does not pick and choose. It does not require disabled individuals to prove their legitimacy. It does not exclude underrepresented groups simply because their struggles are less widely understood.

To be clear, this isn’t about demanding a film’s acceptance. Artistic judgment is a festival’s prerogative. But when exclusion is based not on quality, but on a refusal to acknowledge a disability that global health organizations recognize, the issue shifts from curation to discrimination.

The filmmakers even withdrew their interest in screening at the festival. They had no desire to be associated with an event that selectively defines inclusion in a way that contradicts its own stated mission, especially when the exclusion mirrors the very struggle depicted in Unspoken Truth. The film itself explores the barriers faced by those with severe chronic stuttering, including the way institutions dismiss and disregard their experiences. Seeing that same disregard play out in reality only reinforced why the film needed to be made in the first place.

Their goal was never to force their way in but to highlight an oversight, one that, if left unchecked, will continue to erase an entire group from conversations about disability representation. Because at the heart of this matter is a fundamental question: can a festival truly claim to champion disability rights if it decides which disabilities are worthy of recognition?

When Inclusion Has an Asterisk: The Hypocrisy of a Disability Film Festival

SEARCH 30,000+ EUROPEAN PRESS RELEASES

About EuropaWire

PRs by Dates

Industries & Countries

Archived PRs

Recent PRs

POPULAR TAGS

Links