3 ms·

> it’s easy to misunderstand ability as a binary thing. Yes. And also the notion of ability/disability has too many connotations, it makes it really hard to di

> it’s easy to misunderstand ability as a binary thing. Yes. And also the notion of ability/disability has too many connotations, it makes it really hard to discuss the subject. One could posit that having less than perfect vision is a disability (for whatever value of "perfect"). But people will fight tooth and nail to not fall into that category, they'll explain how much they still can do without correction, or straight refuse the definition because glasses compensate their vision. I think at the very basis, accepting that there isn't a "norm" in the first place could help a lot. If there's no normal people, we can start discussion how we're all different and will be good or bad at different things. Another funny lens: people entering a foreign culture where they can't read nor speak should also fall into the (temporary?) disabled bucket. And same for so many other mindane situations.

Paul-Craft 3y ago
You make a really good point here. Some years ago, I probably never would have thought of myself as "disabled" in any way. But, like you mention, I wear glasses, and, depending what the activity is, I can either continue on with little issue, or end up completely useless. I've also learned that I have ADHD and a learning disability. A "disability" is generally defined as a condition that limits one or more "major life activities," which is a term that has its own definition, but it's pretty common sense. One of my disabilities is myopia, which limits the activity of "seeing." My learning disability limits my ability to process visual-spatial information. Without accommodation in certain tasks, I absolutely am disabled. Ask me to navigate an unfamiliar neighborhood alone without my phone, and I'll end up lost, frustrated, and probably not find where I'm supposed to go. Ask me to do it without my phone and my glasses, and it's just a pointless exercise in futility then. But, let me have those tools which I know can help me do the tasks, and I'll be just fine. I am still a person who has some disabilities even with my tools, but they're what lets me manage. It says something about American culture, I think, that being seen using something as a "crutch" is a sign of weakness, when, in fact, a crutch is nothing more than a tool that can let someone who would be otherwise unable to do an activity be able to do so, no more or less than my glasses or my phone.

Paul-Craft 3y ago

You make a really good point here. Some years ago, I probably never would have thought of myself as "disabled" in any way. But, like you mention, I wear glasses, and, depending what the activity is, I can either continue on with little issue, or end up completely useless. I've also learned that I have ADHD and a learning disability. A "disability" is generally defined as a condition that limits one or more "major life activities," which is a term that has its own definition, but it's pretty common sense. One of my disabilities is myopia, which limits the activity of "seeing." My learning disability limits my ability to process visual-spatial information. Without accommodation in certain tasks, I absolutely am disabled. Ask me to navigate an unfamiliar neighborhood alone without my phone, and I'll end up lost, frustrated, and probably not find where I'm supposed to go. Ask me to do it without my phone and my glasses, and it's just a pointless exercise in futility then. But, let me have those tools which I know can help me do the tasks, and I'll be just fine. I am still a person who has some disabilities even with my tools, but they're what lets me manage. It says something about American culture, I think, that being seen using something as a "crutch" is a sign of weakness, when, in fact, a crutch is nothing more than a tool that can let someone who would be otherwise unable to do an activity be able to do so, no more or less than my glasses or my phone.