Post #1490095

2026-04-19 14:47 UTC

@ngaylinn Seeing "screens" as a narrow, impoverished interface is ableist and NT-supremacist. For a lot of people, it is completely liberating being able to function in the world without having to physically move from place to place or show our bodies and faces and voices to strangers we interact with. "AI" is absolutely garbage but this doesn't mean the way we made the world accessible to people who are different prior to the "AI" scam was wrong.

Replies (1)

@ngaylinn@tech.lgbt 2026-04-19 15:16

@dalias Not at all. I'm not saying screens should be abolished, just that they are an unnatural and limited way for an animal to interface with the physical world. Doesn't mean they can't be incredibly useful or desirable! We choose them for a reason. I'm glad that screens are a tool for different kinds of people, both as an equalizer, and as a way to remove specific obstacles to life and relationship. However, a disabled person is so much more than how they appear on a screen. Their embodied experience is real and valid, too! If anything, they may have a greater need for in-person relationships with actual physical human beings, just as much as they may also have a greater need to engage with society without leaving the house. The problem isn't screens, it's imagining that a life lived entirely on screen is enough, or that it reflects a full human being.

Open ##1490096