This week’s reading, “Design meets Disability,” offered a new perspective on combining design with accessibility, particularly emphasizing the role of aesthetics in functional products for individuals with disabilities. It made me reflect on products like glasses, which are not typically seen as disability aids. Could their widespread acceptance and fashionability be the key to changing how we perceive all assistive devices? Glasses challenge the old notion that assistive devices must sacrifice aesthetics for functionality, illustrating that you can have both. This concept resonates with me and aligns with previous readings (The Design of Everyday Things: The Psychopathology of Everyday Things; and A Brief Rant on the Future of Interaction Design.) that suggested attractive products enhance user experience and influence consumer choices more than technical features. For example, the iPhone, while not always the most technologically advanced, remains popular for its intuitive and appealing design. This revelation led me to reconsider how products that are both functional and good-looking could redefine societal standards and expectations around disability.
Further exploration into the role of artists and fashion designers in normalizing and destigmatizing disability aids underscores the transformative power of inclusive design. Why haven’t we involved more creative professionals in these discussions before? The article highlights the importance of a collaborative approach in design processes, integrating insights from various disciplines to achieve a balance between functionality and aesthetics. This approach not only widens the scope of what can be developed but also enhances the user experience for people with disabilities, offering them the luxury of choice and the pleasure of recognition—privileges often reserved for the able-bodied. This shifted my previous belief from advocating for universal design to recognizing the value of targeted, specialized designs that meet specific needs without adding unnecessary complexity. The discussion about linguistic changes—from “patients” to “wearers” and from “hearing aids” to “HearWear”—raised interesting questions about how language shapes our perceptions of technology and disability. This reading challenged me to rethink how inclusivity can be woven into the fabric of design, aiming not just to add it as an afterthought but to integrate it as a foundational principle that enhances the dignity and quality of life for all users.