tobydandelion

[tobydandelion]

"Who is 'Entitled' to Accessible Spaces?"

-

I recently came across the opinion from a wheelchair user, that strollers/prams shouldn't be taking up space in 'wheelchair' sections.

See, I was under the impression that the blue sign with the person in the chair is just a symbol used to mean ''disability in general'' to the general population. Wheelchairs being a highly visable disability aid that a lot of people use- that just makes sense. But it seems like this can cause some folks who use wheelchairs to think that theirs is the only truly valid disability that should be allowed to take up "extra space" in public?

Because it should be obvious that strollers have every right to be anywhere that a child in a wheelchair does, because that's what that is. It is a person who has trouble either walking or standing for long periods of time, and the equipment needed to help them move around comfortably. And expecting their parent to hold them the whole time they're in public- just because that person is technically "small enough to hold", is completely unempathetic to that child and parent.

You're expecting someone to be less comfortable than so you don't have to change your behavior or think about other people's experience. That's incredibly ableist. Childism is a form of ableism rooted in misogyny, and I find it pretty annoying.

That's the 'entitlement' some people talk about when it comes to disabled folks- some just don't have the proper words to use, so they say the same thing as bigots. But sometimes by saying your behavior is "entitled", they just mean that you're refusing to understand other types of struggle besides strictly medical- that you don't understand the social model of disability.

And with the social model of disability, being a parent of a baby, let alone the experience of being a baby, is absolutely a disability.

By excluding parents and other people who require large pieces of equipment as accommodation to make their daily lives get a little closer to the average level of comfort, you're alienating people who could also benefit from increased disability accommodation awareness and acceptance in public spaces, and help you fight for it, if you just explain that properly.

And explaining that parenthood and childhood are effectively disabilities would be a good place to start.

---

Oooh I got staaahted, lol. Implying my child has any less right to be somewhere than you do just because he's in a stroller instead of a wheelchair is very silly to me. Thanks for the inspo, but please touch some grass, folks. I promise it's nice.

[tobydandelion]

"You Know What We Mean"

-

Saying "Biological Women" in normal conversation is like saying "all people with a skin tone of brown pigmentation". Like, obviously of course you could argue that people "know what you mean", but it's weird and obsessive and bigoted to lump all humans that happen to have that random characteristic together for things like gyms and clubs, despite other characteristics that are much more relevant to that person, especially in such an obviously intentionally coldly medical way.

And, speaking of that- before you say it's necessary for "medical reasons", I birthed a whole ass human. So I know exactly what language is medically necessary. And the vast majority of gynecologists agree that inclusive language saves lives and improves prenatal and postnatal care. (And I'd love to get into the pedantic nittygritty of 'chestfeeding', ect.)

Sure, people "know what you mean"- they know exactly what you mean. They know you've been taken in by a cult that exploits your high parochial empathy and trauma to use you as a weapon against your fellow marginalized folks. And I think that's really sad for you. You're wasting your life on hate instead of living it with love because you've been tricked by our mutual oppressors.

---

Short and sweet one today. And physically getting there slowly but surely! You can see the top of my abs again yay, lol. >:3

[tobydandelion]

'The Greatest Trick the Devil Ever Pulled is Convincing the World that He Exists.'

-

Trans people can actually tend to be ''predators'' more often than the general population- just emotionally, not sexually. Because, I dont think that it's hyperbolic to call the actions of untreated codependency or borderline traits "predation". As individuals of any heavily maliged group would (through no fault of their own), many aquire harmful behavioral coping mechanisms after complex trauma.

That's just how the cycle of abuse works. The Cycle of Abuse is just a concise way of visualizing being someone who carries out harmful behaviors that our brains make up as a reaction to trauma. And I don't think there's some magic, arbitrary line that turns ''coping mechanisms that cause harm to others'' into ''abuse''. "Abuse", in effect, seems to actually just mean "harmful actions that I don't understand the brain processes behind".

So, conversely, all harm is abuse, even "justifiable" reactive harm (unless it is actually directly preventative *imminently*), because all intentional harm is inherently reactive.

Because even when there is malintent, that's still just a coping mechanism created through no fault of that person's own. And shaming these kinds of behaviors does not change them, it makes people double down and isolate.

Calling reactivity abuse doesn't make someone want to change their behavior, it makes them defensive. It shuts down their frontal lobe. It turns off their empathy by turning up shame. It makes them darvo as a life-or-death knee-jerk non-choice. If you don't come at abusers with empathy, you won't foster any.

And if someone doesn't see harmful actions as abusive, this is usually because they don't belong to the same social group as the individuals being harmed. It's an issue of empathy and education.

Being happy that magas are frustrated about Price Of Egg is a part of that cycle, btw.

"See, that's just what you get!" is exactly what an abused younger sibling might yell while their mean older brother is being beaten for teasing. I think we should realize our suffering has a mutual source, and end the cycle.

---

Might use this as a reading comprehension/reactivity test irl for the time being!

[tobydandelion]

Forgot I haven't posted a new picture since having my bub. Figured anyone lurking might wanna see who's cooking. I can do pull-ups again already! >:3

[tobydandelion]

Little comic or video skit idea about autistic community gaslighting reguarding Support/Severity Levels:

1) ['Arm Injury Support Group' sign on the wall. Two figures are illuminated as if sitting in a circle, one figure holding up a finger with a small paper cut, one figure with their arm entirely off.]

2) Off: Yeah, it can be pretty hard to get things done sometimes, I wish I had a little more help-

3) Cut: Oh gosh me too! I know EXACTLY how you feel! I wish I had help, but I just power through it. It's so hard, but I do, somehow. [With a self-satisfied expression.]

4) Off: I wish you wouldn't say that, it feels a little dismissive, like you're affirming that you actually don't understand my experience, because you don't understand that medical stuff like this really is measurable-

5) Cut: What?! No, I have it just as hard! You don't know MY experience! For all you know, it's just as hard for me to pick things up, I'm just better at figuring out how, I must just be better at living with this than you! I'm just 'high-grabbing'!

6) Off: [looks, exasperated, toward the group leader]

7) Group leader: Well, the vast majority of doctors agree with one of you, but the legions of teenagers on the internet agree with the other, so let's call it a difference of opinion! [With a shrug]

8) Cut: [arms folded, angry expression] I can't believe they tried to silence my marginalized voice like that. Wow. [Looks down at folded arms after a moment then suddenly remembers to hold up hurt finger.]

----

Just a cheeky little idea I had this morning after a few days of talking with some new friends who are helping me practice my dbt skills, lol <3

[tobydandelion]

Medicalization and Public Health:

I used to think that the diagnosis of level 1 autism was almost meaningless, once I learned a lot about it and how to identify it, because I realized that maybe a fifth or more of the population would probably quality, if nobody masked. I used to think that since it's such a common neurotype, and so many less disabled autistics use their traits to their advantage to gain or retain power and wealth, that their experience is so far removed from level 2 and 3 autistics to the point they are hardly disabled by autism.

But they are- they just pretend they aren't. Or rather, don't want to accept that they are in great pain, and have wasted years training themselves to needlessly and detrimentally take that pain every day. And that, combined with the results of their childhood trauma and lack of emotional intelligence, cause undiagnosed level 1 autistics who don't properly accommodate, or continue to mask, to be some of the most harmful people to society. Undiagnosed and unaccommodated autism is a public health crisis.

Some people don't like to accept the reality of the cycle of abuse- that 'hurt people hurt people', but it's just true. That's just how some brains react to trauma, and that reality making you uncomfortable shouldn't matter when it comes to what to do about it.

And acting like autism is some cute fun quirky club, and not a medical/neurological problem, doesn't help the angry internet troll who's childhood was nothing but confusing pain, only to grow up and be told he has all the power and control, despite not being able to understand why he can't connect with people or society as a whole. I could definitely understand how that feels like gaslighting.

"That doesn't make it right to treat people like that!"

Yeah no shit? But when has shaming ever changed human behavior? Studying to become a parent has only reinforced what I learned when I worked with animal behaviorists- positive reinforcement is really the best way to change behavior.

People act like neurodivergence and mental health should be such private, personal things- but they aren't. It is a matter of public health. The same way you're harming someone who cannot be vaccinated by refusing one yourself, refusing to treat and accommodate neurodivergencies are similarly Not Just Your Business. We, unfortunately, live in a society, where our mental well-being affects each other's. And this, "I dont owe anyone anything" attitude is how we got to this level of collective trauma- it needs to stop.

Remember, masking doesn't just hurt you, it hurts everyone around you by hurting you. These cycles need to stop. Every time you choose to mask, or don't accommodate, you are making a choice to harm yourself and others.

I'm not saying anyone can be perfect at this- sometimes we need to push through the pain and then heal. But preventing the harm in the first place whenever we can is just the most ethical and logical practice.

---

Trying to forgive the Glindas and Curlys is hard, but when they say, "forgiveness is really for the forgiver," they might have been, to my frustration, correct.

[tobydandelion]

"People like that never change!"

I've seen people say, "abusers see forgiving as a free pass to keep abusing," but I think that demonstrates an ignorance of how the human brain learns and makes new connections based on positive reinforcement.

Of course just forgiving isn't going to work, if you don't identity the cause of the behavior in the first place and actually work to change it. But all maladaptive behavior that hurts other people (abuse, for short) does have a root cause, and all brains retain enough neuroplasticity in adulthood to change these maladaptive learned coping mechanisms, if the person is actually willing to try to learn and change.

And yes, if you've dehumanized narcissists or (other people with commonly abusive learned coping mechanisms) to a cultish extreme, it might be surprising to know that most people like that actually would like to change! But from neuroscience, we've learned that the human brain shuts down from learning new information when in a state of either fear, shame, or anger. And the rhetoric around "abusers" seems to almost be designed to produce exactly those feelings in people who've hurt others. It's punitive justice- it doesn't work.

And of course I don't think it's the responsibility of the people who've been victimized by abusive behavior to help the person who has hurt them! Putting up real boundaries is important for healing, if that's what you feel like you need, but expecting everyone to feel like they have to do the same is unrealistic. Someone has to keep trying. No one deserves to feel that deeply lonely.

We need to find a way to protect people from abusive behavior, but the way to do that is not to dehumanize people just because their brains happened to react to trauma in a different way than yours.

And even if you really can never find empathy for them, letting them get real help is still the only logical thing to do, since, as I mentioned, dehumanizing them only perpetuates the cycle of abuse and creates more victims and abusers.

-----

Pov my brain when someone shittalks my still-in-recovery narc friend lol

[tobydandelion]

'What's wrong with just wanting to be a part of a community?'

I don't think anyone's doing it on purpose, but yes, I believe that the "Autistic Community" can sometimes actually make it harder for neurodivergent people to get help. There's all these little disagreements about labels and demedicalized terms and what symptoms even look like, that are all extremely confusing for cognitively disabled folks to navigate in times of crisis, which is usually when people are in need of the most clear, guided help. I think that on a broad social scale, we need to start talking about all neurodivergencies in terms of symptoms, as disabilities.

Because otherwise, what about folks who actually could get help, but just need the correct words to say when a doctor asks what's going on? Because not everyone is able to understand their own symptoms from the inside. They have nothing to compare it to. There are probably thousands of people who will never start accommodating their autism, just because actual helpful information has been obfuscated by the theories of mentally ill children.

---

Just some brief thoughts before bed, could be useful later. Stay moisturized, y'all.♡

[tobydandelion]

On Why I Still Name My Abuser:

I don't think I should remove the video asking people to find her, and I don't think there's anything wrong with talking about her. That's a time capsule of what it looks like to escape abuse. It's not pretty, but it's an important snapshot in time of what some disabled people have to go through.

And, plus, my lawyer is actually still trying to find her, because she still kinda owes me a lot of money from when she canceled my debit card with all my money left in our shared checking account. Plus her half of our debt to our old landlord. She's still on the run from legal justice, so I don't think there's been enough atonement to have any qualms with warning people that she might not be the safest person. Though, I've decided not to prosecute the physical and emotional battery, because I've learned enough to assign what she did to me to her own trauma.

But, I'm on disability, so yeah, I'm gonna be petty about money though. Laurynn Lasnek from Iowa (Laurynn Snow often online) owes me, like, a lot of money. And if she thinks that's not true, she should actually please sue me, so that I can finally prove that it is, and use that money she owes me for my growing family.

----

Definitely gonna have to run this one by some folks irl before I make it a video for sure lol, but I think it's reasonable? I have plenty of time, we'll see.

[tobydandelion]

Here's the one element I think I'm having the most trouble understanding about people who are staunchly pro self-diagnosis: Why is everyone acting like it's so helpful? Do you not realize you can treat and accommodate neurodivergence without claiming to have a particular disability? Especially when doing so has a huge negative impact on the population you're claiming to identify with. And especially when there are so many different reasons that symptoms you may identify as autism may be presenting.

Saying that being skeptical of self diagnosis is classest is just a thought terminating cliché. "It costs money to get diagnosed, so all self-diagnosis must be inherently valid, because any consequences of people speaking for a vulnerable population they don't actually understand are too intersectional for me to handle", is basically where you stop with that. And that exemplifies the style of thinking that likes to prop up self-diagnosis- "Oh yay, an easy explanation for everything wrong! I can just follow this particular support group/online cliqué and stop looking now, and if there's anything I notice in myself that doesn't actually fit the diagnosis, I can just chalk that up to 'lol spectrum' for any symptom!" When that might be the last thing that's actually helpful in the long run.

---

I literally accidentally saw half a post as I was dropping something else off on my blog and this fell out of my brain, lol. Glad it did! Definitely turning into some kind of script at some point.

[tobydandelion]

What is Universalism?

So, I basically realized I was still a Christian as soon as I heard of Universalism, because for me, it finally solves the biggest logic problem of Christianity I could never get over: If determinism is true, by merit of God's creation and infinite foresight, how could he send people to hell as 'punishment' for things he knew they would do, literally as he was creating them? And if he knows that external influences over humans that we cannot prevent are what causes man's 'evil', how could he blame us for that? I thought, "If even on the cross, Jesus asked for forgiveness and mercy for those who mocked him because he understood that they "know not what they do", why is that not extrapolated to all 'evil'?"

When I was on a true crime kick while I was pregnant, I read a lot of people's thoughts about the concept of 'evil', and I noticed that people think there's a lot more 'free will' in our choices than there actually is. They'll say there's some invisible 'line that's crossed' between mental illness and evil, and I thought of these people as ignorant of the systems in place and severity of disability symptoms that are the actual causes of interpersonal conflics.

And lately, I've realized I've had these same prejudices towards reactionary hatred that some have towards mental illness. I've used the concept of 'evil' as a self-made target to direct my fear and malice towards. Just like the average True Crime Girlie who thinks someone is 'evil' for being disabled and not receiving help in time to prevent a tragedy, I blamed people for being ignorant and scared and hurt in a world that's basically designed to create that type of person. I realized that I was blaming people for 'choices' that weren't really choices, given the circumstances of brain chemistry and external influence, just as they are.

That's why I think discovering Universalism has really been helpful for me. All it really is is taking Jesus' words to heart, to understand that he came to take the burden of eternal punishment off of all of God's children, without exception. It's helped me to really ruminate on the concept of determinism and faith and choice in a productive way for my healing, I think.

Don't get me wrong, I don't forgive these people, I'm not that strong. I leave that to God. But as a Universalist I can at least look forward to the day that I stand next to my enemy in the kingdom of Heaven, where we're both made perfect to the point where I can.

[tobydandelion]

Just One Example of How Easily Some Disabled Folks Can Become Trapped in Harmful Relationships and a Tip to Avoid This:

So, I think I might be ready to try dating again, now that my postpartum issues have resolved, and we're all settled into some good routines. Of course I've been doing a lot of thinking, and talking with my therapist and friends about "red flags" and things, and I realized it might be helpful to some younger disabled folks to kinda give my perspective on how some disabled people can end up in some really bad relationship situations.

Thankfully I'm in a really good place now- I'm in a queer-platonic poly partnership with my very good friend, who happens to be the amazing father of our child, and I'm living with him as the stay-at-home dad! Like, literally my cringey egg fanfiction.net teenage dreams coming true, I've absolutely been blessed by Queer Jesus for my struggles. So don't get me wrong, this isn't some kind of sob story, I'm just describing an unfortunately common sociological phenomenon I was party to, and hope my understanding of could possibly help at least someone avoid in the future.

Like a lot of queer scapegoat-role severely autistic kids, I was ejected from my parents' care shortly after turning 18, so I had been bouncing around between friends, until, one by one, they each eventually realized how disabled I actually was, and being overwhelmed with the amount of help I needed, turned me out to the next one. This was a brief cycle, only about a year, before I met someone who I thought finally understood and loved me. She didn't get mad when I couldn't make phone calls and didn't know why, she said she was happy to do that for me. She didn't get mad that I couldn't drive, she was happy to take me anywhere I needed to go. She didn't mind that paperwork overwhelmed me, she loves doing paperwork. She understood my meltdowns, and would never try to cause them intentionally or use them against me. You get the idea.

So this was probably codependent-flavor love bombing! If someone shows up to suddenly solve a longterm unadressed need or crisis, don't let that blind you to everything else about them. The relief of finally getting that help can mask a lot of behavioral red flags until it's too late. That's something that even less disabled autistic folks need to look out for. Also, if their solution is to solely rely on them forever, and they're fine with the effort of that, but not the effort of finding you a longterm solution or accommodation that increases your independence, that's another problem to watch out for. If someone actually cares about you, they're going to want to see you gain independence and grow, not stagnate and wait around like a supporting character in their life for them to be the valiant hero for.

At first you don't really notice someone has full control over your life because they provide enough help to keep you more comfortable than when they found you, so you're just stoked not to worry about being on the streets anymore. But then, once you're hooked and control has been firmly established, they start using basic needs as leverage in arguments.

When someone's response is "you're an adult, do it yourself" for a task they've established for years at this point they're more than happy to do because they know how difficult or painful or impossible that task is for your disability- that is, yes, abusive. (We have medical gaslighting at home, kids!) Not only that, but it is absolutely dependent adult neglect. That person has not taken a legal caretaker role, but they absolutely ethically have. (Especially if they get you to marry them for their financial benefit like she did!)

(Brief politics break, but I wanna warn young trans guys, when you marry a trans woman, you basically legally become her property in most states. It's kinky if youre into it, but don't rush into things until you really know them.)

And of course, the whole time they'll try to prevent any additional gain of independence.

She did this both physically, like with preventing my medical cannabis prescription, but also emotionally. She told me no one would ever put up with the lighting accommodations I need. She told me that wearing earplugs indoors wasn't something anyone could ever live around. That no one would put up with my needed level of stimming. That it was necessary for me to be in torturous pain just to make the people around me more comfortable, for her social anxiety.

That's not love, or even friendship. That's trying to pretend someone isn't disabled even though it's destroying them, just so you can feel needed at your convenience.

So, that's why it's important to look out for these slippery slopes. The edges are hidden and look like a refuge, but that comfort can be the bait of a trap, even if they seem like the safest person you can imagine. Codependent people make themselves look as safe as possible, to attract people to 'help', no matter how maladaptive that safety or help actually manifests to be over time.

So basically, young autistics- If someone is a little too eager to fill your water bottle, they just might be too codependent to be safe. Watch out for overly helpful behavior, and never put up with medical gaslighting. Your symptoms are real and you have a right to be just as comfortable as everyone else. And if you need to let a codependent person into your life briefly because you really need the help they're offering, just be careful. Stay diversified- If everyone else you know says the person who drives you everywhere is bad news, it might just be best to try to find someone else to drive you, before you look around and realize they were driving you into isolation and dependence, to feed on your appreciation.

And no, not every codependent person is a narcissist, though both are valid neurodivergencies often caused by abuse themselves. But vulnerable people at different levels of healing should try to protect each other from any of these maladaptive coping mechanisms where we can, until we can all finish healing enough to stop hurting each other and actually end these cycles.

---

Once again, posting for now as a rough script for shortform content later on. I think that bit at the end is pretty good, I've noticed a lot of young abuse victims confuse codependency and narcissism very often, and that's incredibly unhelpful for anyone.

[tobydandelion]

Severely Autistic Adult explains the actual problems with self dx:

When your don't have a good neurologist, or actual psychologist specializing in Autism, diagnose you and explain your diagnosis to you properly, the only place you're learning about autism is just among those of similar support needs, based on how social media functions. So when you spread misinformation in a video, we often don't even get to hear it, because usually, You're Boring Your Eyeballs Into The Camera so we can't even read the captions we usually need to even process what you're saying. So, most severely autistic folks cannot watch these types of videos to even dispute the misinformation within. That's just one example how we're shut out of our "own community" via lack of social supports and education. It's a self-reinforcing exclusion. Your understanding of the severity levels of sensory and cognitive impairment that can be "Just Autism" are then limited even more, causing folks to spread misinformation about other people's disabilities, and what more severe autistic accessibility needs look like in general.

And that's not even my main problem with self diagnosis- there's also the huge crossover of symptoms in the DSM to consider- and I'm absolutely sure autism self diagnosis is preventing a lot of people from understanding their fixable problems that come from complex trauma and require intensive inner child work and DBT, rather than just autism accommodations.

So it's not always invalid, but it requires a lot more work than the average 22 year old barista on tt has the time, energy, and media literacy skills to figure out, so being skeptical that someone isn't actually just ADD, or some other cousin neurotype, with unaddressed CPTSD due to that, and not autistic, should be valid as well. And I really wish "labels" didn't matter, but they unfortunately do, when these are the people prescribing language and obfuscating the actual types of accommodations society needs more of for MY DISABILITY that they demonstrably do not understand.

For instance, why do self diagnosers hate the word 'Severe' so much? Is acknowledging someone actually has a life quantifiably harder than you really so ego-shattering? Oh, oops, it actually is, because none of you will go get proper therapy for your trauma because you're all too busy in cycles of codependency and accusing each other of being secret evil narcissists, when really you're all just traumatized weird kids who are desperate for community and don't know how to heal. I get that now. But just, try to find that without prescribing language for people's disabilities, if you could please. And if you have time to self diagnose, you have time to take a full DBT course online or do some DBT workbooks. No matter what your neurotype, they are useful skills, especially if you were not raised kindly. And for every low support needs person on social media you follow, seach and try to find just as many higher support needs folks to follow too. And other severely disabled folks of all disabilities, too.

(Leaving this here to read feedback, refine the points, and turn it into shortform when I'm up to it, probably next year. Sorry if you've ever dm'd me, I do not consume any Tumblr currently, I only post. Super burned out, only social spoons for my baby and our team.❤)

[tobydandelion]

Disabled Villainy isn't Ableism, it's Realism, or; Some People are Wrong about Nessa.

[Some 'Wicked' stage musical/Movie part 2 spoilers]

So I've been seeing a lot of takes about Nessa, (mostly on YouTube since that's the best social media platform for my current neurological needs), and there's a somewhat common one that I have the strong urge to dispute into the void. Some folks seem to misunderstand Nessa's role in the deconstruction of 'Evil'.

The Wizard is Systemic Evil, Glinda is Complacent Evil, and Nessa is Socially Traumatized Evil.

Because Wicked isn't just deconstructing society's perception of evil, but also Evil in practice- which comes from not only bias, misunderstanding, apathy, and greed- but also, the cycle of abuse. And a lot of disabled people don't like to hear this, because there's that lovely statistic that we can point to that says we're "more likely to be victims"- and that's true of abuse that reaches the level of criminality- but I dont think that's true of day-to-day, average, 'just plain mean' abuse. That kind of abuse is a learned behavior that comes from trauma. And, emotional neglect from your peers is trauma. Feeling like a burden is trauma. Watching all the other children playing and feeling left out is trauma. Being made to feel different over your entire life, is trauma.

Nessa isn't an ableist character, she's realistically Borderline for being disabled in a world without Dialectical Behavioral Therapy. Her character literally feels like she was written with BPD/NPD in mind- lashing out the most when she's feeling abandoned by a person she perceives as "hers", feeling the need to control the people around her, not caring how she hurts people in the process of that attempt to control their affection- she's literally my ex wife. They're both very extreme examples, but, with an understandable pathology. And the less extreme version of that is someone a lot of us need to actively fight against becoming every day. It's not fair that that's our burden, but it is. It's the thick line between healthy self-loving disabiltyPunk, or just being a dick. And it's a part of our extra personal labor that 'Entitles' us to an extra amount of grace that I don't think I'll ever really be able to properly quantify, because that line can be hard to see in the heat of the moment, through years of gaslighting and guilt and shame and resulting internalized ableism that we have the urge to fight against. The only way we can really see that line is in hindsight.

And while media that more thoroughly deconstructs this cycle is neccessary, so is simple media like Wicked. Especially in the context of an example of another traumatized marginalized character who made the decision to start actively trying to follow their ethics over their emotions despite their trauma. And, once again, the solution isn't limiting the options for marginalized characters, it's just making more marginalized characters in general.

A lot of folks also take issue with the entire concept of depicting disability being 'cured' in media at all, but, and thankfully I have actually seen this rebuttal: nothing about her life gets better once she becomes abled. And that's because she still has all that trauma from those years of severe marginalization that resulted in ostracization and feelings of powerlessness. She's still disabled- just only neurologically so, now. This is a terrific example of how different disabilities can intersect, and be exacerbated, or even created, by the neurological impact of marginalization.

In fact, that brings up another criticism that I've heard- that the characters are realistically ableist... in a society falling to fascism... in a story all about marginalization. I'm pretty sure that's intended, you guys.

Maybe I'll turn this into a script to film for shortform content next year when Part 2 comes out- I hope I'm out of Postpartum Depression by then. But I couldn't get this out of my head until I got it into words this morning. I think that's probably a good sign I'm starting to feel more like myself. Thankfully I had time to sit down and rock and type this morning, since my partner is taking care of our baby in the other room right now. (Not just babysitting, either- he's washing bottles.❤) He's 6 months now, and the most beautiful, funny, amazing person in the world. Meeting the new version of him every day as he gets stronger and brighter has been the light keeping me going. And we're already doing PHONICS. 💪🧠

[tobydandelion]

"People with ____ who don't need ____ are still disabled, too!"

...Sure. But, only in that, there is no perfectly abled human. It's a sliding scale, like wealth. And like being wealthy has an inverse- in 'poverty'- there is a point at which the scale is tipped backwards and one lands on the side of being a minority of power, due only to their abilities being limited in relation to others who are still on the other side of that line.

This is the definition I use as in my interpretation of the 'social model', for a person to be considered 'disabled'. This point on the scale changes due to many factors, including your surrounding environment- meaning everything from the neighbors who reside close to you, to the weather outside where you live. And every aspect of life, really.

For example, one person with the most 'extreme' form of tourettes may have a loving and supportive family who provides for them and explains their neurological disability well. They might have access to everything that a neurotypical person might have, and live a "normal" life, with minimal additional effort on their part, relative to the average neurotypical.

Take that same person and raise them in an abusive family or foster care, and they would likely become homeless at 18 or earlier, due to their inability to understand and articulate their disability due to lack of education, and a lack of empathy for their 'symptoms'. Their entire life would be focused on a constant effort just to survive.

These two people would have vastly different medical and psychological needs, even if they 'have the same disability'. I don't think it's unfair or illogical to define one of them as being 'more disabled'. Looking at how the word itself literally works, it's true by definition. One person has had many abilities removed, the other has less abilities removed.

Another example would be to compare myself, as a relatively well supported High Support Needs autistic person, and many medium range support needs folks, who aren't getting any accommodations at all. I might be calm and feel only slightly stressed, in a waiting room for example, if I have sensory food snacks, my earplugs, music, my compression clothing, sunglasses, stim toys, a trusted companion, and a head full of strong cannabis oil. I feel like I have a lot of agency in how I can communicate and move around in the world when my needs are met in this way.

Whereas a Mid Support Needs autistic person, who might just need half of my sensory supports to feel just as comfortable in the same setting, could be nearly immobilized by stress and pain without an adequate way to communicate why. I would feel that that person would be 'more disabled than me', in this instance.

And a Low Support Needs autistic person would likely not be disabled at all in this instance, as their needs are met at low social cost, often without realizing that they're even using 'disability accommodation'. (Hence they are still in the 'majority of power', therefore, 'not disabled'.)

Also, since I'm learning a lot about babies right now, using this framework has kind of made me start to think of babies and toddlers as just very, very, very disabled people, who need constant physical and neurological therapy to improve their agency over the world and reduce this disability. (Kinda filtering everything through thinking about babies right now, lol. :> I'm very excited.)

(Just some random theory thoughts from someone who's going to college soon, if anyone has suggested reading or listening regarding this topic do let me know!)

[tobydandelion]

Just had an idea to expedite research on like, any topic- making a burner account to confidently declare things one is actually unsure about. Folks online would much rather correct others than answer their questions, so it seems efficient. I'm unsure of the ethics of doing this, though. Would that count as spreading misinformation? I never hold genuine mistakes against myself or others, but since the correction might not necessarily be seen along with the iffy post, this might be unethical.

Also, since there's no way I'm the only one who's thought of this, now I'm wondering how many 'troll' accounts out there are actually just doing this. Probably not many, but definitely not none!

[tobydandelion]

I just watched OliSunVia's latest video about Giorgio Agamben's concept of 'homo sacer', and it got me thinking about how the way we choose who is and isn't worthy of medical care with the goal of comfort is very dependent on personal politics, as well. (I'm sure there's a word for this concept but I haven't come across it? Where in general, one's life is deemed preservable, but not worth the effort or resources to have suffering removed or mitigated. Such as incarcerated, homeless, and neurologically disabled folks.)

Which then led me on the tangent of medical care as a human right, which reminded me about one of my favorite unpopular opinions to argue with people about in real life. (This kind of thing might be why I don't have friends right now?🤔 I'm sure law students will enjoy these types of discussions more than freshly hatched 22 year olds on grindr, lol.)

So, I really wanna read people discussing this, but I've never seen anyone else sincerely arguing for the less popular side here, and I'm very curious if anyone wants to discuss it.

Why, if we value medical care as a human right, do we not continue to try to make efforts to give medical care to 'uncontacted tribes'? Taking the concept of medical care as a human right to its' logical extreme, this should be something that would be worth the effort and resources to continue to attempt, while trying to mitigate risk.

I was discussing this with my boyfriend, and his best refutation was that he would assume that they were very healthy in general, and didn't suffer from most medical issues due to their lifestyle of natural diet and exercise. While I'm sure they have less instances of certain conditions, there are some medical issues that just straight up require modern medicine, such as gynological care. If we, as a society, have deemed it 'the right thing to do' to force medical treatment on folks such as those with neurological disabilities "for their own good", why not force medical treatment on these folks who could physically benefit despite the psychological and cultural harm, as well? What is the actual difference there? Just that they're a different culture and ethnicity? I don't believe that should matter.