Lots of people in fandom are aware of the Social Model of Disability, which is a direct contrast to the Medical Model of Disability. Problem is, most of those people only understand half of the Social Model.
If you donāt know what Iām talking about, the āin a nutshellā version is that the medical model views disability as something that is broken and which needs to be fixed, and little or no consideration is given beyond trying to cure it (and little or no consideration is given to the needs and wishes of the person who has it). The social model of disability, on the other hand, says that the thing that disables a person is the way society treats them. So, for example, if someone is paralyzed and canāt walk, what disables them from going places is buildings that are not wheelchair accessible. (Or possibly not being able to afford the right type of wheelchair.) Inaccessible spaces and support equipment you canāt afford are choices society makes, not a problem with the disabled person.
People then take this to mean that the only problem with disability is the society that surrounds it, and therefore in some utopian future where capitalism is no more and neither is ableism or any other form of bigotry, all problems disabled people have will be solved.
Except that what Iāve just described is not actually what the social model of disability says. Or, rather, itās only half of what the social model of disability says.
The actual social model of disability begins with a distinction between impairments and disabilities. Impairments are parts of the body/brain that are nonstandard: for example, ears that do not hear (deafness), organs that donāt work right (e.g. diabetes), limbs that donāt work (paralysis), brain chemistry that causes distress (e.g. anxiety, depression), the list goes on. The impairment may or may not cause distress to the person who has it, depending on the type of impairment (how much pain it causes, etc.) and whether itās a lifelong thing they accept as part of themselves or something newly acquired that radically changes their life and prevents them from doing things they want to do.
And then you have the things that disable us, which are the social factors like āis there an accessible entrance,ā as described above.
If we ever do get a utopian world where everyone with a disability gets the support they need and all of society is designed to include people with disabilities, that doesnāt mean the impairments go away. Life would be so much better for people with impairments, and itās worth working towards, but some impairments simply suck and would continue to suck no matter what.
Take my autism. A world where autism was accepted and supported would make my life so much easier ā¦ and yet even then, my trouble sleeping and my tendency to hyperfixate on things that trigger my anxiety would still make my life worse. I donāt want to be cured of my autism! That would change who I am on a fundamental level, and I like myself. My dream is not of a world where I am not autistic, but a world in which I am not penalized for being autistic and have the help I need. And even in that world, my autism will still sometimes cause me distress.
There are some impairmentsāconditions that come with chronic pain, chronic fatigue, etc.āwhere pretty much everyone with that impairment agrees that the ultimate goal is a cure. But nobody knows how long a cure will take to find (years? decades? centuries?), whereas focusing on the social things disabling you can lead to improvement in your daily life right now.
In conclusion: the social model of disability is very valuable, and much superior to the medical model on a number of levels. But: please donāt forget that the social model makes a distinction between disability and impairments, and even if we reach every goal and get rid of all the social factors that disable people, some impairments will be fine and cause no distress to the people who have them, some will be a mixed bag, and some will still be major problems for the people who have them.
Also on Dreamwidth
you know, "we don't even consider near-sightedness a disability because it's so normalised and accommodated" is a common and mostly-true refrain, and it occurs to me that even that still sometimes causes me minor distress. i like my glasses! but they're heavy enough to be uncomfortable whenever my sinuses are acting up
