the historical origin of disability was “anything that kept people from participating in labor”).

These narratives are already overrepresented, and in some cases, they have done damage to disabled people as a community, disabled people as knowers, and the experience of disability as valid and valuable.

Disability (a social category) isn’t a problem to be solved by technology. But MIT Media Lab’s Hugh Herr regularly says, “I don’t see disability, I see bad technology.”

Apparent disabilities are thus sometimes used to signify internal moral or characterological disability.

As the disability community notes, euphemisms like “differing abilities” elide the realities of disability (some of us can’t do some things in some ways, and that’s okay) and work against disability identity and pride (it’s hard to have a pride movement when people can’t even say they are disabled).

Technoableism is a particular type of ableism, one that is highly visible in media and entertainment and omnipresent in the ways most people casually talk about technologies aimed at disability. Technologies for disability can never just be “tools that are useful sometimes,” in the phrasing of Jen Lee Reeves. Technoableism is a belief in the power

Former poster children—literally what they were called and where that term comes from—were called Jerry’s Kids. In the actual telethons, Jerry Lewis waxed on about the horrible fate awaiting children with muscular dystrophy.

“disability is inherent in the human condition,” and it is important to our world. Disability is many things, not just visible differences or those that affect mobility, and we can expect more disability (not less, as Herr hopes) in the future. Even if the technologists’ wildest space fantasies come true, everyone is disabled in space—with gravity

the initial identification and social expulsion of Jews and others, the confiscation of their property, their ghettoization, their deportation, and, ultimately, even their extermination.