'Transablism' is now a thing?!

This has been a very interesting discussion because every talking point and argument used by the disability self-id perspective mirrors TRA

Agree, consider this:

Disabled people are dying in their thousands, and able-bodied people are arguing against actual disabled people (and being abusive when disabled people try to give their own opinions and experiences) that the burden of proof should be even higher, that disabled people should not even be allowed to ask for access accommodation at work, or reveal their disability socially, without medical evidence?

Is this not the same as the TRAs ‘suicide’ argument?

If no evidence is required then anyone can claim to be disabled and no one can disprove it, and that includes transabled. If ‘work’ refuses to make accommodations and it ends in court then which side wins if no evidence is required? How does the transabled individual who identifies as disabled differ from someone who identifies as disabled but with no medical evidence of this? Ultimately disabled people will lose out.

I do think we should ask questions about the way we've been inclined to use language like "identify as". There ay have been good reasons that people started doing it, or it may have been meant to be kind. I'm not convinced it is really useful or ads clarity. I think there are other ways we could talk about problems that don't meet medical definitions. And I think maybe it would be a good idea generally to consider whether using language you don't prefer is really something to get upset about.

I mean, can you even imagine a situation where an athlete goes on TV and announces "I'm 100% able-bodied, there's not a single thing wrong with me, but in my heart I always felt aligned with disabled people, and I'm so proud that finally the Paralympic Committee has recognised that able-bodied people are equally valid as disabled"? No, of course not

Yes, the equivalent here is "My penis is female".

This has been a very interesting discussion because every talking point and argument used by the disability self-id perspective mirrors TRA. In my opinion anyway.

I mean, can you even imagine a situation where an athlete goes on TV and announces "I'm 100% able-bodied, there's not a single thing wrong with me, but in my heart I always felt aligned with disabled people, and I'm so proud that finally the Paralympic Committee has recognised that able-bodied people are equally valid as disabled"? No, of course not.

But right now we have men announcing that in their hearts they have always been women and they are happy to be competing in sport as women.

No, a few years ago I never would have imagined that either. But now I am much more suspicious. Many people would do anything to gain some sort of advantage for themselves.

Why is it dangerous?

There are already issues with perceived cheating in the paralympics. Athletes claiming that other athletes are presenting their disability as worse than it is in order to be put into a category where they will find it easier to gain success.

The whole “this could never happen” thing bothers me. I have precious few privileges as a disabled person as it is. Even they are often claimed by questionable self identifiers; people without blue badges taking parking places for instance.

To take the whole thing to the absurd level it has reached with the transgender issue would mean that “disabled” like “sex” would cease to have be a term with any meaning. And disabled people, like women, would lose services, spaces and awards.

I suppose that would save the government a lot of money.

I think MsMaisel that the first effects of transableism will be showcased at the next Paralympics. I really do not think that people will be hurting themselves to be able to qualify for the meagre benefits offered.

Lots of us thought that men would not be allowed to compete against women, and then they were.

I have an undiagnosed child and no horse in this race. Unless I can id as a horse.

Medical evidence of disability is not one and the same as a diagnosis. There are many profoundly disabled children who will never receive a diagnosis but have masses of evidence of disability.

To compare that to someone with late stage MS whose medical notes have been lost, or a wheelchair user who is deemed fit for work, or someone with a congenital disorder who is undiagnosed due to NHS waiting lists, or really any person with an actual disability who can't or doesn't want to have to prove it, is horribly offensive.

I get it is offensive to compare transabled with disabled just as it is to compare Transwomen and women. But we have to be able to prove the distinction and ‘identifying as’ doesn’t allow this. Being undiagnosed does not prevent you from proving disability: indeed you can claim DLA without a diagnosis.

the posters saying that disabled people aren't allowed to call themselves disabled without medical evidence are the ones doing that
Oh, so you do support self-id. I wish I'd known that at the start of this conversation!

MsMaisel you are conflating disability with diagnosis; they are not the same.

Another parallel with transgender ideology here is women being told that talking about logical consequences is the "bogeyman".
Women are told when giving an example, "you've given me no evidence apart from your isolated example".
Women who are disadvantaged are ignored. Karen White only had a few victims, is an isolated case, so it is not a useful case in point".
Women have their credibility questioned because they want to talk about the charlatans. "I'm wondering what the agenda is of people constantly bringing up cheaters"

Australia has a different welfare state with less stringent yet difficult barriers to access the pension.
Nonetheless many years ago a fairly successful rock musician in my social circle said that he'd got the pension due to alcoholism. He said that a lot of his acquaintances shared tips on the right things to say to the doctor to become permanently eligible for the disability pension. It meant they could focus on their careers without fiddling about with all the dole bullshit.
Now were these rock musicians genuinely disabled, legally disabled, identified-as-disabled, pretenders, charlatans, opportunists, pragmatists, or doing what they were legally allowed to do, a la Rachel Mckinnon?
My point is that this group were effectively functioning in the same way that part of the transgender community functions.