#writing intellectually disabled characters

[cripplecharacters]

You have a post on intellectual disability. How much of that post also applies to characters who have brain damage? Parietal lobe specifically.

I have one character with intellectual disability and another with brain damage. They're classmates, both asian, both have last names and families that love them very much, and I will never ever kill them off bc my mom likes them both very much.

You said you want to see intellectually disabled characters going on cool adventures. Does getting kidnapped by demons and tortured count as going on cool adventures? They both survive, but rescuing them is the main motivation of the heros. They recover from the experience fairly well. They like spicy food.

Hello,

Please consider the real-world implications of the whole kidnapping and torture thing. I am begging you. People with disabilities like intellectual disability seem to be constantly in the news due to human cruelty committed against them. Off of the top of my head, I could name five different cases of someone with intellectual or developmental disability being kidnapped and tortured. I don't think I've ever heard of one case where the victim in question survived. This kind of violence against disabled people may seem to extreme to be real but I assure you it is, it's far too common. My parents even had safety measures in place to protect me from this happening to me because the threat of stuff like this is so real.

Look, I just would not approach that unless you have one of those disabilities. Cases like that are real, they are common, they are brutal, and they often end up with the disabled person six feet under with some of the most horrific things on their autopsy. Real people lose their lives in situations just like that one and the ableism surrounding the prosecution of the criminals involved and the media reaction to these cases... there are no words. Crimes like that... I cannot properly convey how strongly I urge you against turning a case like that into a plot point. That is not a cool adventure, that's a story my parents see in the news that makes them terrified for my safety. I get dark fiction, I get coping through writing I truly do, but if you're equating this real-life tragedy with a "cool adventure" and then just brushing past it and mentioning that they like spicy food as though the trauma is a fun little fact, I do not think it is wise for you to write this.

I strongly advise scrapping this plot- I don't even think this should be reworked, this just should not be approached like this. In all honesty, I almost don't think this should be approached at all by someone without these disabilities. Just don't. If someone must be kidnapped and tortured and rescued, do not make it these two characters. Make it some other abled character. This is just way too real.

(Also, they would not just recover fairly well. Having intellectual disability or a TBI does not protect you from PTSD and trauma- if anything, it will make the characters more susceptible to PTSD and trauma due to how their brains will process this. This recovery would be long and hard because not only are we more susceptible to getting PTSD after trauma, but we're also harder to treat. This will not be an easy road. Not even remotely.)

Mod Aaron

[shiraishi--kanade]

"Nobody is using Curly's disability as a narrative punishment for inaction!" bro. The game does

[imbecominggayer]

Writing Advice Part 2: Disability And EVIL

Disabled adults are adults and because they're adults they have a wide variety of morality and characters since humans are an exceedingly diverse group with even more diversed existences.

WRONG!

No. No. In reality:

👿👿DISABLED ADULTS ARE EVIL, ALL EVIL!!!!!!! 👿👿 According to certain writers!

When writers take communities and existences such as the facial difference gang or the intellectually disabled doers this results in horrific portrayals of "demonization". Obviously, people with physical disabilities are often portrayed horribly. I will mention them in the facial differences saga. The only reason I am specifically talking about facial differences and intellectual disability is because physical disability and facial differences tend to overlap while intellectual disability is a common yet undertalked form of representation.

Demonization: it's just like what it sounds like. Disablity always equals evil

However, the ways that facial differences gang is demonized is different to how intellectually disabled doers are demonized.

THIS BECAUSE OF A COMMON ASSOCIATION aka

Good = Beautiful/Handsome, Evil = Ugly

For future reference, when I say ugly I mean "not conventionally attractive" and when I say beautiful I mean "conventionally attractive". Afterall, Harvey Dent is attractive. That's a fact.

A popular example of this is the James Bond franchise which has stocks full of villainous characters with various limb differences, scars, and other such things. These ugly and bad characters fight against the cool and handsome James Bond

Literally, the association between evil and "ugly" is so ubiquitous that when a character becomes disabled they also become evil. The transition between being law-abiding handsome attorney Harvey Dent and evil insane "ugly" Two-Face is marked by fire/acid.

Let me tell you, there is no link between being a bad person and being not conventionally attractive. I'm not saying you can't write bad people with facial differences but they're not bad people because of their facial differences.

Secondly, Facial differences aren't only scars. They are often congenital. There are hundreds of different kinds of facial differences. This was just to talk about the fact that most people hear "facial difference" and think "scar".

FOR INTELLECTUALLY DISABLED DOERS, their evilness comes from their supposed "mental status as a six-year old". For the purposes of clarity, I am just going to say that's not how intellectual disability is labeled and move on.

Because of their supposed "mental status" 🤢, they have no ability to guage morality. They're " *derogatory term* who does evil out of ignorance"

Firstly, intellectually disabled people can learn things, like morality. Especially, if we are talking about the majority of intellectually disabled people who have to mild-to-moderate intellectual disability. Either way, there are hundreds of education prgrams designed to help people in learning about things from periods to childrearing to reading to everything necessary for life.

Secondly, intellectually disabled people aren't children. I talked about that in Part 1 named Writing Advice: Disability And Infantilization. Check it out, it's fun.

Thirdly, intellectually disabled people exist in the real world. If you want to write a character who is intellectually disabled, you can ask them for assistance. There is nothing stopping you.

CONCLUSION: No matter what disability someone has, that shouldn't stop them from being human. You can write disabled characters as evil but disabled characters should be evil not because of disability but regardless of disability. Evil Doesn't Equal Not Conventional.

[cryptdfish]

“white mourning.”

[bemnie]

any1 here have mircocephaly or know some1 who has some sorta social/media presence?

I like making disabled ocs and i saw a video abt this condition that made me mad so I wanna make an oc with microcephaly now! , but all the articles i can find atm are about raising a child , not really anything about the person who has it yknow?

I know a lotta people who have it have intellectual disability so sometimes its unsafe for them to be on the internet but yea maybe im just bad at looking? would love any help <3!

[lunathewafflelord]

Currently writing a post regarding the double standards when it comes to disability representation in the media and how it's strange that people are usually okay with physical disability (blindness, deafness, wheelchair users, missing limbs, etc) representation but get really critical of intellectual disabilities (mostly autism in this case)

Are there any topics that people would like to see discussed in this post, like personal experiences regarding this subject? Feel free to send an ask or a message!

[rainbow-banana-slug]

eye strain warning

gummy 🌈🐬

[plain text: gummy 🌈rainbow emoji🐬dolphin emoji]

(^ shark emoji not blue enough)

[id: dark skinned black person with williams syndrome in decora kei fashion walk with posterior walker. person have pink hair with rainbow bangs n all sorts hair clips in hair & stickers on cheek. have many rainbow necklace include one with double yoke egg. wear blue sweater with white cloud where one sleeve is yellow horse with pink leash thing. there many pins on sweater include gummies (gummy shark, peach ring, gummy worm, gummy bear) & green crayons & others. she wear cross body green dino plushie (bag?). rainbow vertical stripe pants with rainbow n star chain. one shoe red one shoe blue. posterior walker made of different color crayons. there text around character describe her which be functionally described below. end id]

🌈🐬.

girl (complicated gender) with williams syndrome n love decora kei fashion & bright colors (she call them happy colors/excited colors)!! she has lotssss of bows n head pieces n hair clips n necklaces n bracelets n other decoration & big wardrobe with bright colored clothing! she love wear different outfits but it consistently decora kei.

she love gummy candy & named herself after them >:) blue/red gummy worm & blue gummy shark her favorites (blue gummy shark also my favorite. to look at.)

williams syndrome (also known as williams-beuren syndrome) is genetic developmental disorder micro-deletion of some of chromosome 7. for gummy, WS lead her have moderate intellectual disability (ID) & global developmental delay, level 2 autism, ADHD-c; congenital heart defects (CHD); hypotonia (low muscle tone), & loose joints.

like many people with WS, gummy very friendly & social! she love hugs & talking to people & talk lot & very physical in show affection! but also often struggle tell when other people not want be social / be social with her, be called “a lot” & “too much,” which lead her have trouble make n keep friends n make her sad—even tho WS make her extra outgoing, she also still get sad n mad n not hide it. she also struggle with danger awareness & often treat strangers like would with friend, n it been something that her support team very focused on work with her entire life because this lead her be very easily taken advantage of n be put in danger.

also like many ppl with williams syndrome, language & verbal abilities her strong suit—tho it’s relative to her moderate ID, so one shouldn’t expect she write speak communicate like average person without struggle. her words more simple, n still need many help for communication, including various form of AAC & aide person.

she has aides that pretty much 24/7 present because WS & moderate ID but working on skills so can be more independent! it something she been work very hard on entire life n she quite proud of progress.

she has many classic facial features associate with williams syndrome, like epicanthal folds at eye, upturned nose, wide mouth & small teeth, small jaw, full cheeks (badly drawn), n large ears.

70% or more people with WS have some sort cardiovascular problem, n so do gummy. she has supravalvar aortic stenosis (narrowing of aorta) which form of congenital heart defect (CHD). hers not very severe n be closely monitored.

she also have hypotonia & loose joints due to WS & uses posterior walker full time to get around. she really like her posterior walker, it shaped like many crayons :D also wear SMOs but forgot write it so oops

art fight character profile

[reblog welcome but please no repost]

[brw]

I know that I sound like a broken record when it comes to Charles but if you aren't willing to say the word disabled or wheelchair in your analysis of his character or his cultural relevance or his relationship to his students just don't fucking say anything! It is just willful ignorance at this point, I have no idea how you can talk at length about this fictional character's desire for "normalcy" in his students or his fears of violence from other people if they aren't respectable enough without acknowledging the role his status as a wheelchair user influences these beliefs he has. Genuinely a half-hearted attempt that isn't fully developed is better than just outright pretending it doesn't exist or isn't important. I'm becoming so increasingly frustrated with how unwilling so many people people who attempt to analyse the X-Men intellectually are to acknowledge disabled politics or perspectives in their writing. I understand it's scary if you aren't physically disabled but if you're doing that much research into queer history in the 60s through the 2020s to inform your reading you can find one article about disabled history. I feel like I'm going fucking crazy here.

[cripplecharacters]

Okay what counts as a cool adventure for an intellectual disabled character to go on. I'm sorry I sent that ask about the demon kidnapping. That was wrong of me and I should have known without having to ask. I will discard that plotline. I deeply apologize for my behavior

Hi!

Any actual adventure that you would send a non-ID character on could work as a good adventure for an intellectually disabled character. Maybe the ID characters take the main role and save an abled character from a villain, rather than the other way around.

Mod Rock

[beaft]

thanks for this response - and thanks to everyone else who answered too! i feel a little clearer on it now. when i first read the announcement i was like "ugh, come on", but i was confused as to why the backlash was so extreme. sure, they don't condemn ai, but they also "don't explicitly support" it, and they state that individuals have "the freedom to make [their] own decisions", which... has kind of always been the case? as you say, you could write BUTTS fifty thousand times and still "win", and it would defeat the entire point of the challenge just as thoroughly as using ai, and it would be just as functionally impossible to prevent. the organisers could have said "no ai allowed" and people would still have used ai. it means nothing. anyone can cheat. the question is why would you.

but i guess what it comes down to, really, is the difference between acceptance and endorsement. are they throwing up their hands and going "well, i guess you can if you want to", or are they actively championing generative ai as a tool? knowing that the organisation is sponsored by LLM platforms like ProWritingAid definitely makes me feel a lot more uncomfortable about the whole situation. i personally still find their stance more condescending and misguided than actively harmful, but i definitely understand why so many people are withdrawing their support.

forgive me if this is a foolish question but can someone explain why everyone is so up in arms about nanowrimo giving the ok to people using ai to generate their novels? like yeah, obviously it's stupid as hell because this is supposed to be a creative endeavour, but it's not like the people who do this shit are gonna be making any money or getting any clout from it. is it just because it's bad for the environment?

[starlightswordfight]

omg first gaslight district post from me YAY (SORRY THAT IT'S AN EVILPOST THIS HAS JUST BEEN IRKING ME A LOT)

I've seen like. a good few people interpret breadhead's character like he's a "dumbass"? or something? even though NOTHING in the pilot gives me that impression at all I'm gonna be so real

like he talks slowly. he doesn't use a lot of words. that's it? he's not "A Total Dumbass Lmao", he LITERALLY just doesn't speak the same way the rest of the smiling dead does??? we JUST got here????

if someone were writing or interpreting him with like. intellectual disability in good faith this wouldn't be bothering me so much. but it's mostly been people mocking the character for it. or insulting in some other way. which I don't think is very good faith at all. I think some of you are just pointing and laughing

I LOVE these characters and this show so far and all the things people have been making for it but I'm gonna be so real if you see a character that talks slowly and speaks in short sentences and your first instinct is to make fun of said character for Being Idiotic. well. let's justr say. please unpack that right now

[thousandyearphantombunker]

"we want more mentally ill/disabled characters with ugly symptoms!"

You guys can't handle lapis lazuli tony stark or hank pym! You guys can barely contain your ableism toward the hulk! You guys hate the good doctor for all the wrong reasons! You made fun of his speech patterns and his meltdowns wtf like I'm sorry the only autistic person you've supported have been the perfect non annoying type- but too many of especially as children are like shawn- they talk weird and don't understand what's so offensive about what they said

You guys keep saying Lapis should just be rewritten into a villain! I don't like how the show handled her but like your really gonna make the girl who shows ugly bad symptoms of ptsd into villain? You guys keep trying to make hank into a villain or rewrite his past- god forbid a character have really sevre ugly symptoms that causes them to make decisions that permanently effect the story but have them still be heroes! God forbid Ironman have npd and be a hero! Let's shame MCU Bruce for his mental illness for being unable to do things because of it! God as soon as a character with a mental illness or developmental disorder or low IQ shows actual symptoms and behaviors (ei: acts like how someone with the disorder in question acts- you know the main part of having a fucking disorder) you get pissy and pile on the shame- yeah jen you do control your anger better than bruce- you can also stand better than Charles fucking Xavier! Yeah your smarter than a guy with a low IQ want a cookie?

I'm never gonna be one of those people who tell others to stop writing disabled villains or that writing a character that deals with internalized ableism (disabled people like any group of people can be total prices of shit, and I'm sorry not everyone is content and accepting of their disabilities and some of us take comfort in characters that struggle with being angry because of their problems) but Jesus Christ when a heroic character with ugly symptoms who makes cruel decisions or has 'bratty' or 'immature' moments can we let them stay heroes? Can we let them have a disorder without piling on the shame that we are inferior because we can't do something everyone else can- because that's literally what a disability is! Can they still be heroes?

Do we have to use intellectual/developmental disability as a shorthand for anti intellectualism and being a gross annoying psycho

Do we have to make every heroic character with aspd or npd into a villain or change their disability to autism because it's 'more sympathetic' as if lack of empathy isn't a goddamned symptom of many disabilities like PTSD and autism- You can headcanon tony as having autism- that's cool by me but it's clear some of y'all do it to make him a 'woobie'- which is infantalizing btw but also it's because some of y'all are ableist toward people with npd

I hate that the only acceptable 'ugly symptoms' are things like forgetting to shower or brush your teeth every once in a while or being a bit irritable and not stuff like burning bridges or having explosive outburts

Also it's not a mental illness unless it effects your behavior?

Im not saying that we should just accept and allow mentally ill/intellectually disabled people/characters to get away with bad behaviors unpunished but can they stay heroes? Can they still be respectable?

"we want more characters with ugly symptoms"

Yet

You people get offended by low functioning autistic people existing! You get mad at them for being incontinent or nonverbal/making strange noises or having scary anger issues or IQs low enough that they will never be independent you get mad at them for not showing the 'appropriate' reactions to things they may or may not fully understand- you hate people with sensory issues -

You don't want mentally ill/disabled characters- you want characters with the labels of mental disabilities without any of the ugly strange or off putting behaviors mental/intellectual deficiencies/issues cause- you want a romantic tragedy!

You shame people with Alzheimer's for FORGETTING stuff and LOSING SKILLS 'yeah yeah you are superior to your uncle because you can remember stuff but can you remember it's a fucking disease! you people are cruel

Yes you are technically superior to disabled people because you are capable of things we aren't and you have better character and you can control yourself but guess what? Those people you hate for being incapable of that shit have disabilities it's not our faults! It's the fucking definition of a disability! Like yeah it is a skill issue and we're just 'worse' than nondisabled with us lacking self control and having lower IQs and bad mental processing- yeah it is because we're lacking in some capacity that's like the definition disability you can't say you support disabled people and then turn around and say shit about how your better than these people because you can talk or take care of yourself

Hank Pym and Lapis Lazuli should get called out for acting like assholes and pieces of shit but I am firmly against turning one of few heroic characters who actively struggle with psychosis and delusions into another 'psycho' villain and I'm firmly against saying Lapis is just as bad as Jasper and using symptoms of her PTSD as signs she should be rewritten into a villain- I want them to be held accountable not turned into straight up evil guys or dear god washing out their problematic qualities until they're palatable/relatable to a neurotypical audience to make them good guys when they are already good guys!

Can people who do bad things because of their disabilities still be heroes? Can they be allowed to get better or do they have to accept that having ugly symptoms means being the bad guy? Fucking hell this is why I side eye anyone who acts like mental illness/developmental/cognitive or mental etc disabilities are more destigmatized than physical disabilities (trust me they aren't)

Tldr let characters with ugly symptoms be heroes let your characters with mental disorders act like they have a disorder and let said characters be heroes inspite of it!

[barbiegirldream]

Dream categorically understands the humiliation of being intellectually disabled that none of these people ever could whether he has an intellectual disability or not. He sat in a car with someone insulting his sexuality, his character, his intelligence and the entire internet said he was right to do it. Affirming that Dream was all the things he was called. And if the harassment wasn't enough now they're dancing around calling him slurs for not understanding what their double standards are about. For not being able to grasp why he can be called every slur ever but he can't ever push that humiliation away.

I know what that's like when you are becoming intellectually disabled and it was the most humiliating thing that ever happened to me.

I was 19 in college my second year of straight dean's listing. I could write a good 10 page paper in 2 hours. And then I started getting sick. Really sick. I couldn't hold a coherent conversation by my junior year of college. I couldn't think. I had my professor get the worst feeling in the world and call me. I was on the floor crying my eyes out all day because I had failed to get dressed that day. I could Not make my arms move. I went home for the semester.

I was 20 years old and my mother watched my arms shake as I tried to hold up a brush and my fingers slip as I tried to in a haze braid my hair to avoid all the tangles it was getting. So I sat in the shower and let my mother wash my hair and brush it. Every night she braided my hair. Every doctor's appointment she sat by my side to recount everything I was losing. Because I was losing my mind and my intelligence, my body wasn't listening cause that's an aspect of intellectual disabilities people forget. I was humiliated everyday. I was sick of myself as much as my body was sick of me.

So to see all these people online insist they have the strongest and most correct opinion about slur discourse, you don't. You have no idea what humiliation looks like or you wouldn't be Doing this. You wouldn't engage in these campaigns. People want to reclaim some power by acting like all intellectual disabilities are something good and something to be proud of. Which maybe in some cases I don't know. But I would give anything to have my brain back to how it was. Literally anything. So no I do not care what words people use when there is real material harm done on such a grand scale it's become like tv entertainment for these people

[ichayalovesyou]

Why Do Old-School TV Duos Have SUCH MLM Vibes?!

I think there’s something very specific about the formula and writing style of non-serialized/semi-serialized shows from the 60s to 80s that featured two grown men going on wacky dangerous adventures that makes my gay little literary analysis brain go absolutely off the wall bonkers. I’m trying to figure out why!

I’m writing this on my Trek blog because I don’t think this pattern in people actually shipping these types of relationships the way they do if fandom as we know it wasn’t born via TOS in syndication. That being said! I also think it has to do with the way these shows are designed that makes myself and others OBSESSED with a specific character dynamic that feels (to me) damn near impossible to replicate in modern television. In a way that’s more than just fandom, it’s in the way TV like this was written at the time!

Further explanation under the cut!

🏳️‍🌈🏳️‍🌈🏳️‍🌈🏳️‍🌈🏳️‍🌈🏳️‍🌈🏳️‍🌈🏳️‍🌈🏳️‍🌈🏳️‍🌈🏳️‍🌈🏳️‍🌈🏳️‍🌈

I think what it usually boils down to is this. There’s a charming protagonist whom without the series could not operate, frequently top billed or the title character! (See: Wild Wild West, Starsky & Hutch) BUT he doesn’t have anyone to play off of! So what do they do pretty much every single time? Give Mr. Idealized Vision of Time-Period Masculinity For Genre a second guy to rhyme with!

See but the other guy has to play opposite but parallel to our hypermasculine protagonist. So what frequently ends up happening is that in order to play off our “normal” guy, even though he’s also a white dude, is that he’s still somehow Other.

They’re always perfect for each other, and they always get into scenarios that would be written, shot and interpreted by conventional audiences as romantic IF either one of those characters were a woman! Especially at the time these shows were made in.

If the one is aggressive, the other is gentle. If the protagonist is violent, his counterpart is intellectual. If the one is stoic, the other is emotional. Which (while one size def doesn’t fit all) usually makes the second guy come off as much more queer-coded (and sometimes other minorities like neurodivergent/disabled etc) than the other because of the traits associated with masculinity vs gayness at the time! Our prime examples in these gifs are Spock, Hutch, Artemus, and also *BJ!

*(M*A*S*H is a bit of a unique case since the show flirts with queerness more openly in ways that people more into the series have explained better than me but I think it still fits the formula I’m discussing.)

Here’s the thing though right? We’ve got two best friends, and the show NEVER really feels right if one of them is missing unless the focus of the story is how A & B operate without each other while trying to find the other one. They stick with and rescue each other unfailingly in scenarios that might destroy a regular friendship.

Hell, there’s often stuff that would emotionally/physically destroy a regular person/character in modern media. But because it’s not serialized they always seem to pull through seemingly through the power of friendship alone or dealing with it off-screen! Emotional consequences? Yuck! (Unless it’s M*A*S*H or Starsky & Hutch, like I said, not monolithic)

Here’s the thing that some people might say throws a wrench into the interpretation I’m discussing. What about the absolutely non-stop parade of conventionally attractive women the main protagonist (and less frequently the supporting man) goes through?

I would reply: how many of those female characters actually emotionally impact our protagonists as characters long term?

The answer is of course, because it’s NOT serialized, almost none! Kirk can watch Edith Keeler get killed by a car accident and still be making eyes at Spock the next episode. Hawkeye can have a “life changing” romance with a Vietnamese humanitarian woman, then share a blanket with BJ next episode like she never existed!

The Doylist explanation of course is not just the fact it wasn’t serialized but also just, constant, blatant 20th century sexism. Which SUCKS!!! As well as not wanting a long term love interest to throw off the character dynamic of our duderagonists. It’s the 20th century tv equivalent of bros before hoes.

However the Watsonian explanation always seems to result in no love interest EVER being more important than what the two protagonists have no matter whether you think they’re queer or not. No attractive woman could make our reputed babe-hound protagonist abandon his buddy. There’s no earnest romance our more queer-coded supporting man doesn’t end (or get ended for him) often for the protagonist’s sake.

Now some of these women are incredibly well written and straight up GOOD matches for our guys. So why wouldn’t they get involved in something long term UNLESS!! They were in love with each other the WHOLE time?

What if protagonist (frequently the babe hound) doesnt know he’s queer, or knows but doesn’t know he’s in love with his bestie, or any number of similar fruity explanations? The supporting man also runs into this explanation but people tend to believe he’s already aware that he’s queer but either also doesn’t know he’s in love or is keeping it to himself because time-period homophobia and/or thinking (probably not unreasonably) that babe hound is straight?

Between the inherent closeness of being narrative foils. The regularly scheduled life or death drama creating sometimes insanely romantic (in the narrative if not a literal sense) drama between the two. The revolving door of weekly women they never seem to get attached to enough to leave one another. The non-serialized nature resulting in sparse personal information/history about the protagonists as a result.

I think between the very NATURE of the way tv shows were written at the time. Plus the way fandom was shaped by a dynamic that has rippled through how media works and is interpreted by fans for decades upon decades. It’s not hard to imagine getting really emotionally invested in the possibility of the protagonists being in love is a fantastic way to enjoy the media!

In conclusion, it’s really fun and easy to go “these bitches gay! Good for them good for them!”

[ethos-labrador]

idk how to articulate it exactly but all the AI talk on this app feels really ablist to me

like i'm not saying that AI use should be encouraged, it's bad for the enviornment and all that, but constantly using arguments about how you're stupid and incapable and "rotting your brain" if you use AI make me uncomfortable

you're not stupid if it's hard for you to write an an essay. you aren't lazy and incapable because you struggle to understand books that your peers don't. you aren't pathetic and not trying hard enough if you want to roleplay with fictional characters but have trouble finding real people to do that with. and again, i'm not saying that using AI is the answer to those problems, but making fun of people for using it by calling them stupid or lazy for using a tool you aren't desperate enough to try is not the progressive take you think it is, and i also don't think it will actually get people to stop

like. you know what else i was told was making me stupider and rotting my brain for?

using spellcheck. watching spongebob. playing videogames. (all things heavily associated with ADHD in kids at the time. a kid in my class' mom quite literally thought spongebob caused their ADHD)

you're just taking the rhetoric of folks who hate ppl with neurodevelopmental and learning disabilities and tacking it onto a new technology. nobody's going to spontaneously develop an intellectual disability because they used a slightly newer technology to cheat on an essay than all the previous methods kids throughout history have used to cheat on essays

[tawked]

Honestly I feel like a lot of narratives and discourse about cures for disabled characters generalize and simplify the concept of cures so much that it's impossible to really glean anything meaningful from the art / conversation.

It feels alienating because it implies that we as disabled people all relate to our disabilities in a specific, identity-driven way.

In reality, some of us aren't even considered disabled by other disabled people, and some of us are considered disabled by able-bodied society while not considering ourselves disabled. Some of us exist in incredibly historied and sophisticated disabled communities going back over a century, and others simply do not have communities due to ableist societal factors like institutionalization. Even with autism alone, the lived experience of someone with level one support needs autism and someone at level three with a co-occurring intellectual disability are so different and subject to such segregation that sometimes it feels many of the former aren't even aware the latter exists, while discussing disabled rights.

It just feels very weird and silly to assume we're all in the same spot and are going to agree universally with the idea that cures bad.

Consider: the concept of a cure for "the disabled" includes

the medical genocide of Big D Deaf society as it presently exists,

and

me as a cute lil schizophrenic baby boi with massive hot balls potentially not needing to live in constant fear that I might slip into psychosis and lose another year or two of my life lol.

These are incomparable consequences of a hypothetical cure, imo. However, when we discuss cure narratives in universal terms we're often blurring these lines.

In real life, the reason we dislike the idea of prioritizing cures isn't even universal.

Many of us dislike the idea of a cure as the endgame of disability accommodation, treatment and research in real life, because that approach leads to the misappropriation of funding that could be used to achieve a better quality of life now based on some hypothetical maybe-future.

Many of us dislike it because our disability is core to our identity in a fundamental, sometimes even cognitive developmental way, and the idea of a cure is synonymous with the destruction of one's standard state of being / personality / concept of self.

I would like a cure for my specific condition to exist, but understand in realist terms that this would be a massive dice roll with funding that could be used to make my life better now. My perspective as someone for whom accommodation means engaging with pharmaceutical drugs is going to be different to that of someone for whom accommodation is entirety social or environmental.

So with all of that said:

Do we hate Barbara Gordon being cured because we just do not like the concept of curing the disabled as some kind of uncritical "harmful trope" detached from any real disability political concept? Y'know, "it's offensive," without an understanding of why it's offensive and to whom specifically?

Or do we hate Barbara being cured because it's a betrayal of over a decade of character writing? Her arc included some of the most human and real writing around disability in all of comics especially at a time when disabled characters just plain sucked (so, any time).

Much of it centered on her learning to be comfortable in her body and in being perceived as disabled, unlearning that shame and overcoming the fear of being subjected to ableism. There were some very real beats in that. If you have physically disabled mates, you've probably had the "so when should I let her know I use a chair" conversation. Well, there is a whole short character beat around Barbara working up the confidence to date while disabled, leading to her meeting Ted Kord. Dixon's time with Barbara is full of little profoundly human moments like this that simply do not occur with Daredevil, Xavier, the Chief, blah blah blah.

And y'know, retconning that to two years in a chair and some Batman Standard PTSD (that is, badly written PTSD) betrays the complex character arc that came before, while also reducing aaall of that writing from a complex personal journey through identity, minoritization, discrimination and human relationships through the lens of ableism, to "a wheelchair." It's dehumanizing for many disabled fans because it invalidates the value of Barbara's role as Oracle / a disabled superhero able to achieve a reach beyond her younger able-bodied self due in part to innovations she made due to her disability.