QT: Even by your own beliefs, sexuality can't be based on "gender identity"

submitted by BiologyIsReal from self.GCdebatesQT

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]ZveroboyAlinaIs clownfish a clown or a fish? 15 insightful - 4 fun15 insightful - 3 fun16 insightful - 4 fun -  (4 children)

Sounds like this thing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_model_of_disability

That "people have disabilities not because of disease, but because of how society is treating those people".

So their idea is - "if society will accept disabled people more, than all disabilities would dissapear and people will become healthy".

Which is obviously some post-modernistic bullshit with no sense of reality.

[–]GenderbenderShe/her/hers 4 insightful - 6 fun4 insightful - 5 fun5 insightful - 6 fun -  (3 children)

There is a difference between a disability and a condition. I was classed as having a "specific learning disability" in school, yet most of my struggles were not due to my LD, but due to the school system discriminating against me. I was in a self-contained class FULL TIME until high school, even though my behavior wasn't disruptive. Then in high school, when I was in general ed, I had no say in my IEP. The IEP meeting at the end of sophomore was full of a bunch of adults talking about me without involving me in the conversation. They decided next year they will work on "a better understanding of social cues" without asking me if that's what I wanted to work on. Would people like it if a bunch of professionals talked about them without involving them in the conversation. I didn't write my IEP goals, they did.

I fully agree with the social model, as do many other disabled people. Disability is a result of interaction with society. For instance, if you're in a wheelchair, there will be many places not accessible to you. If you're autistic, you don't interact the way the neuro-majority interact. That's what disability is. Disability doesn't mean not healthy and it doesn't necessarily mean people will become healthy if treated better. Though the way society treats disabled people is abysmal.

For instance, a lot of disabled people have medical conditions and use healthcare but don't have access to it. I used to have a painful and rather embarrassing condition that barred me from working and not many doctors treat. The only doctors that treated it were not in our network, and I was incredibly lucky my parents paid for the treatment so I could work. If we had universal health care, I could have just made an appointment without worrying about payments. And don't even get me started on insulin prices. Many states have work requirements for Medicaid, so that means people have to work to get treatment for a condition that makes them unable to work. A paradox!

I am fortunate enough to be able to work. Yet some people just can't work. SSI pays $771 per month for an zaindividual, and that doesn't even cover rent. Most non-working people who I know living on their own had their parents pay for their home. One of my disabed friends was stuck with abusive parents because she couldn't afford to move out.

The healthcare thing is specific to the US as every other developed country has universal health care. Though other countries also segregate disabled children in schools. In France kids often don't get help for ADHD. China stigmatizes autism. Granted these things happen in the US as well.

I would not cure my LD as the real problem for me was the way society treated me and not my LD itself. I fully support the social model.

[–]ZveroboyAlinaIs clownfish a clown or a fish? 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

You are correct that medical condition and disability are different things.

Medical condition is general term which includes big array of diseases, disabilities, disorders, lesions and even non-pathologic changes to organism which require medical attention - like pregnancy.

Disability is a medical condition which limits person's movements, senses or activities.

And it has nothing to do with society at all. I will not start see on both eyes and return my eye back if society stops stigmatizing disabilities or if we rename "disability" to something what sounds better.

Doctors not treating disabilities is absolutely another topic. And linked by me idea that "society just need to make everything more accessible" will not fix those disabilities and will not make doctors to treat it - the opposite, doctors would stop treating them completely. Many disabilities require medical treatment, so changing treatment to social model can hurt or even kill them. Instead of that model - we just need to raise inclusivity as we are doing already, and teach more doctors to treat it. It will be really hard in USA, where healthcare is not social like in Europe, so they are aiming for profit, so focusing on more profitable conditions. In Europe this problem is not as big as in USA, at least in countries where I lived.

[–]GenderbenderShe/her/hers 3 insightful - 6 fun3 insightful - 5 fun4 insightful - 6 fun -  (1 child)

I think sometimes the social model is better though instead of the medical model, especially in education and other non-medical settings. For me though I would never cure my learning disability, though I would cure other things I have. What was more disabling was discrimination in the school.

We should not replace the term disability. I and many of us in our community loathe the term special needs and handi-capable. I know the non-disabled community likes the term special needs, but to us, it's stigmatizing and othering. Due to this stigma I felt embarrassed for being disabled during my teenage years. These terms just another euphemism for disability. People are afraid of using words like disability, disabled, autistic, etc. so they invent euphemisms like special needs and handi-capable or even people first language. People first language (for those who don't know) is putting the person before the disability, i.e. saying "person with a disability" instead of "disabled person" saying "person with autism" instead of "autistic person." Some people in our community prefer it and that's OK, but many do not. Yet abled people who are often parents of disabled kids or work with disabled people insist it's the polite term and saying "autistic" is rude, even though actual autistic people don't think so and many feel autism is part of their identity. Some people are even told how to identify themselves, that they should not call themselves disabled or blind or whatever. Many people also want to emphasize someone is a person before their disability. It's almost as if being disabled and being a person is mutually exclusive. I corrected someone online for using the term handi-capable for a character. I simply said most disabled people don't the term and to use disabled instead, and that person thanked me. I wish we would stop being afraid to use the term disability and stop euphemizing it. Parents, teachers and professionals should not be afraid to tell a child they're disabled, or talk about disability with children. It's OK to use the words disability and disabled.

On another note, denying someone medical treatment is ableist. Without my SSRI, I would be lying in bed all day. Yet there are people who will insist you shouldn't take anti-depressants or any medication because it's big pharma. I think the term big pharma should apply to pharmaceutical companies because I have criticisms for them, but not the people who need these medications to function. Some people think the profession of psychiatry should be eliminated, which is ableist, because many people would suffer without psychiatry or access to medical treatment in general.

[–]ZveroboyAlinaIs clownfish a clown or a fish? 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I agree on most part with you, but it is not what that model is proposing. That model is mainly saying that it is society which is fault in disabilities, which is not true. Society's fault is in lack of tolerance and in very able-male-centric "standart" of building everything. It has something to do with capitalistic model as well, because disabled people are minorities, so there no reason to spend time and money to design and rebuild things for disabled people. That's why government need to intervene and that's why in more "social oriented government" countries, like in Europe, disabled people have much more quality of life, as it is demanded by government from everyone. Obviously all this should be done automatically, but majority of people are measuring others by themselves - so they may not even know that someone on wheelchair can need something more. Have you read "Invisible Women" by Carez?

Some people think the profession of psychiatry should be eliminated, which is ableist, because many people would suffer without psychiatry or access to medical treatment in general.

I saw that in USA and Russia mainly. Conservatives in USA and Russia are propagating that psychiatry and (especially) psychology does not exist at all and it is like Astrology, just a way to get money from stupid people. They think it has no scientific background and they do not believe those can help anyone at all (and religious conservatives can even say that psychiatry is creating of a devil to confuse people, as god can cure any diseas of a soul and any anxiety).