Thread by @JillianWeise

Why is the word "access" a signifier that slips to "love."

Access is not love. Access is the law.

I don't need you to "love" me in order to make something accessible.

In fact, I don't want your "love." That implies a relationship I don't consent to.

This is not easy shit to say publicly because of how widely adopted access = love.

Justin Dart started this.

Justin Dart's motto: "I love you. Lead on."

No. I don't love you. I don't have to love you. Love is not part of my bid for civil rights. I won civil rights in 1990.

This idea that I, a disabled person, need to "love" you, in order to get access from you?

That seems abusive to me. Actually. Now that I think about it.

I should have access because it is the law.

Not because I love you.

Not because I show you any kind of "special" emotion

Why is this on my mind so much?

Because of how I'm being treated at my workplace. The vibe is: How dare Cy critique workplace? We gave cy an accessible parking space! We gave cy a job! And Cy is DISABLED! Cy should be GRATEFUL TO US. Should LOVE US.

Emphatically: No.

Also my love is not universal and unconditional.

I am not your disabled bb parent godmother gayfather.

I am cyborg. I do not have to love you. Who even are you? That I should have to love you, first, before you give me a podium that's my height in my own classroom?

One of the conditions on my emotions, especially a strong emotion like "love," is that I get to consent to it.

I get to consent to giving you that emotion. And even if I consent to it, I get to withdraw my consent at any time.

Whereas: you do not get to withdraw my access.

I do not have to love you in order to get access from you.

You have to give me access, whether you personally consent to my access or not, because it's not about you. It's about the ADA and that is a law.

#ADA #DisabilityTwitter #UnCare #UnLoving #AccessIsLaw

I do not even have to like you to get access.

I don't have to love you. I don't have to like you.

I should not even have to be on a "first name basis" with you nor know your job title. I'm busy.

In the future, it should go like this.

I'm disabled and I get a job. I don't love any of my co-workers bc I have not met any of them. I go online and fill out a form. The form says "what do you need" and I tell the form whatever it is. Example: a podium.

Maintenance installs a podium in my classroom. It is equipped to my size and height so that I can teach like everyone else.

Guess what? I'm not even there when maintenance does that. I have 0 meetings about it.

I show up and I teach the class. That's all I should have to do

How many meetings do nondisabled colleagues have to have? In order to get a podium, their height, in their classrooms?

Oh, zero meetings?

I've been in way too many meetings bc ppl think I ought to get to know them, like them, love them, be grateful to them for my equality.

People are confused.

Specifically, administrators in higher education are confused about what I owe them in order to get fair and equal treatment at work.

I do not owe them anything. They do not "provide" nor "give" me access. They follow the law. Or they don't.
#ADA #TitleIX