I can understand the first comment being ambiguous enough to cause confusion, but the second makes it explicit. People came in in bad faith, refusing to even entertain the notion that they could possibly be wrong. Why am I obligated to be comradely to people who literally do not believe in medical science about disabilities? Why should I trust my disabled family members' well-being to anyone who ignores medical science when it annoys them?

[–] LeninWeave@hexbear.net 3 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

People came in in bad faith, refusing to even entertain the notion that they could possibly be wrong. Why am I obligated to be comradely to people who literally do not believe in medical science about disabilities?

I agree with you. People did come in in bad faith and with zero understanding of the disability. However, that bad faith came from the very real harm they suffered due to the issues of race involved. That's why I think it's more productive to be comradely here, so we can avoid unintentionally inflicting further racial trauma on people AND so that we can maybe work through these issues in productive ways. I think your anger and frustration here is totally fair, and I share it. But the anger and frustration of other people in the conversation is real and valid too.

[–] Redbolshevik2@hexbear.net 3 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

On some level I agree. Just like John Davidson's immediate reaction being to say that he's not racist is a response to the trauma that being hospitalized for his disability has caused him. But at some point I have to believe my lying eyes and see that there's about an 80% overlap between people who say that educating them about Tourette's is racist and people who do not believe that Tourette's is real. Due to my identity, nothing I say can possibly get across. So do I wait for black disabled people to try to have that conversation? There's already been one disabled black girl harassed off social media for explaining that coprolalia is real and John Davidson is not a racist for his outburst.

So I'm going to do the only thing I can, which is defend disabled people and not budge an inch. I'm not going to be abusive, but I refuse to back down because the person I'm talking to has a different identity, unless we're going to start applying that to the disabled.

[–] LeninWeave@hexbear.net 3 points 2 weeks ago

There's already been one disabled black girl harassed off social media for explaining that coprolalia is real and John Davidson is not a racist for his outburst.

Well, I hadn't heard of this and that's just depressing.

Again, the pain people feel here is very real, on "both sides" (they're not really sides in reality of course). I wish there was a way to fix these things easily, but with these types of trauma involved people (on "both sides") have reasonable and understandable reactions that can make discussion very difficult.

So I'm going to do the only thing I can, which is defend disabled people and not budge an inch. I'm not going to be abusive, but I refuse to back down because the person I'm talking to has a different identity, unless we're going to start applying that to the disabled.

I understand.