Ophiomancy_Xaxax OP t1_j26srrh wrote
Reply to comment by tomatocucumber in There are no ambidextrous people, only people living in denial of their disability. by Ophiomancy_Xaxax
Right. You don't think not being able to use one hand to any reasonable degree would qualify as being partially disabled? As in, "ambidextrous" just means you're normal and both hands function, while it should be everybody else who gets stuck with a label for having a hand they can barely use.
tomatocucumber t1_j26vk1n wrote
The United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities defines disability as:
“long-term physical, mental, intellectual or sensory impairments which in interaction with various barriers may hinder [a person's] full and effective participation in society on an equal basis with others.”
So no. Having a dominant hand is not a disability. Most definitions agree that having a disability means being unable to perform major life activities without accommodations. Being right- or left-hand dominant isn’t a disability really by any serious definition
And frankly, what you’ve posited is a little offensive. It’s bs like this that presents barriers to getting support for people who actually do have disabilities
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments