• AnarchistArtificer@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    3 hours ago

    What it’s meant to mean is “yay us! We’re doing inclusivity!”

    What it actually means, to me, is “we will make a show of valuing disabled people, but we won’t go so far as to actually include them in the design process, thereby making this bench an artifact to our own self congratulation, as well as making wheelchair users feel excluded in a far more insidious way than they already did”.

    And I feel like an asshole to say it like that, but it’s so annoying to see well intentioned people fall at literally the first hurdle. Like, if they truly do see us as people who have intrinsic value that means we are worth including, then they also need to see us in our full personhood and include us in the process. The alternative is that their enthusiasm will just cause more money to be pissed down the drain on symbolic gestures that don’t fulfill their intended purpose

    • LillyPip@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 hours ago

      I could see this meaning something more – and even something inclusive – if the environment is part of the design; for a moment I ignored the steep looking sand bank, but if that’s part of the art, that changes the meaning by a lot. That would make much more sense.

      I’ve lived places where the landscape changes a lot throughout the year, though, so I sort of ignored the background and took the bench itself in isolation.

      Maybe that’s where I fucked up.