It seems like the implication here is “if we can’t do anything, we shouldn’t do anything at all” under the social model.

Not every doorknob will be disability friendly. If pressure from the social model fixes 20% of doorknobs, now there is a group of people can open 20% of doors where they could open 0% before.

▲

SpicyLemonZest a day ago | parent [-]

My intended implication is that pressure from the social model has achieved as much as it can, and the left over problems must be resolved through other means. The vast majority of doorknobs I personally interact with, including 100% of the ones at my house and workplace, are lever-style.

▲

jnovek 9 hours ago | parent [-]

As a disabled person, my experience indicates that we’re not even close to what the social model could achieve.

Example:

I have a chronic pain disorder. I have substantial difficulty working in an office. WFH was an absolute blessing, and RTO has been a curse.

RTO is a regressive policy for disabled people who found they were finally able to participate in their industry for the first time in ages. Now they are expected to take on extra burden to function in an able-bodied world. Many, whose bodies do not allow that option simply have to go back on SSDI.

That is an example of progress in the social model that has regressed back to the medical model.

	▲	SpicyLemonZest 7 hours ago \| parent [-]
		I'm sympathetic to your problems, but I don't think this has anything to do with the social model or medical model. Even the strongest advocates of the social model of disability wouldn't argue, I don't think, that construction site supervisors must be allowed to work from home after setting up some cameras and microphones to monitor what's happening. The dispute here is that RTO employers think working together in an office is similarly important, but you think they're wrong and WFH is just as good.