Alright Cam.
If there is an inherent danger in curing blindness from birth, tell me what it is, and why society should go "We have a cure for blindness, let's not use it and run all these social services instead".
You lose all the knowledge that you gained from your perspective from being blind. Like the fact that you're even questioning this. There's also the vast amount of knowledge that we would lose about how the brain processes visual information, spacial information ect. Blindness in ferrets has been extremely important in understanding neurology.
As I explained in @27, other disabilities have even more to lose. Deaf people built their own languages (https://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/w … n-language). Autistic people will lose their entire identity, who they are.
Also, I'm NOT SAYING SOCIAL SERVICES. The problem is the HIERARCHY between abled people and disabled people, sighted people telling blind people how they work, non-PTSDs telling how PTSDs work. And even more generalized, we are telling people how their own body works when we dont even live them. That's the problem. And you are doing the same when you say "oh blindness is the sucking end all be all" because you represent one experience, not all experiences.
I get that deaf and autistic people don't matter to you when they're not validating your world view, but here's the thing, and what I don't get about your hostility - nobody's saying YOU SHOULDN'T BE TREATED. They're saying YOU SHOULD HAVE THE CHOICE. Yes, there are COMPLICATIONS but you can't just ignore all the other complications because you emphasize one end. And you can't just assume that people who DISAGREE with you are just stupid assholes who "don't get it". That's YOU who's the stupid asshole.
We all get your fucking point.
You need a very high standard of evidence if you're going to tell anyone who has a clue that we should let parents get away with not curing blind children.
I never read your response to the first time i presented this but what is your opinion about people born with glaucoma then? I know people who bailed from the surgeries when they turned 18 because they were so traumatic. How is that not a problem?
And stop talking in blindness cures, blindness cures don't exist. Bodies are machines not ideals.
You will find, even here on the thread we just had, that a majority of the people who are hesitant about a cure think it's because the vision won't be usable. If that's the case, it *has* to be done when someone's a child, or you forever deny that child the choice.
And at the same token you are forcing that child to go through the realities of that surgeries. Treatments aren't cures, they have consequences, they have struggles associated with them that you're forcing people through otherwise. And maybe some people, if the situation was more adapted towards blind living, would rather live blind than being traumatized. Like, jesus christ some of my friends have it BAD and I get I'm the token sightie but can I not say, hey my friend literally told me about when his eye blew up and all the pain his eyes caused him and how he just wished things were usable that maybe, we can think about what that means?
Am I not allowed to think about the context of my friend? Wow, its weird cuz we can talk about this just fine even if we come at different angles. Its cuz we know we're not telling each other "this is the way it has to be" its because we just are talking about it.
To put this another way, are you advocating for PTsd culture? Should we let parents beat their children so that we can continue the PTSD identity?
Oh here you are with this "disability identity" shit. Nobody even said identity. Again. And yet you still manage to pull it out of nowhere. Explain this magic trick to me.
But I also bet you that if we put effort in, we could find people with PTSD who wouldn't take a cure as well, and you know, as long as they're adults, fine.
Wow dude, maybe you should ask what PTSD people have to say about that instead of just assuming for us. Woah isn't that what you complained about with me? Weird how everyone else is starting to get the problem but not you.
Anyways, they already have "cures", its called "zapping you with a strong electro magnetic ray that fries your brain". Man I wonder why people are hesitant.
But not curing a child's blindness literally does as much with respect to poor life outcomes as beating them every day, and before you continue participating in such discussions you should think really hard on why saying that in exactly those words isn't an unreasonable position to take, and realize that that's the position you're arguing against.
have you possibly considered that the "daily beating" is because everything sucks for blind people and how we treat them. Like i keep saying this isn't me saying oh technology can fix everything (honestly you're implying this very heavily). It's me saying that things could be different and we should try to focus on that.
This isn't even going into how blindness would be extremely difficult to cure in the way you propose because of how blindness is caused by a social interaction that is interfered by a wide variety of physical conditions. There will always be types of blindness missed by "cures", but accessibility can benefit all blind people.
What I see here is that you haven't dealt with your disability, and when someone else gives you an inch w.r.t. disabilities maybe not being so bad for them, you grab onto that side of the argument and take a mile because you need a justification to be pissed at the world to avoid coming to terms with it.
Look can you just admit you tell people you don't like that they're just cope-posting? You really want people to respect you but you take a huge shit on everyone who disagrees with you and call them stupid and act like they're just crazy idiots. Damn I wonder why that might be a problem for someone with PTSD.
you like those kinds of gays because they're gays made for straights