This reading made me rethink how much design pretends to care about “everyone” while actually designing for some imaginary default person. The whole debate about hiding versus showing assistive devices hit me the most. The hearing aid example frustrated me. It reminded me of how often people, including me at times, feel pressured to tone themselves down just to blend in. Seeing designers hide assistive devices made that pressure feel even more obvious. If a device supports someone’s life, why shouldn’t it be allowed to exist proudly?
I liked how the reading returned to the idea that objects carry identity. Even in my IM projects, I can feel that tension between making something perfectly sleek or letting it look like something I actually touched. My work always ends up somewhere in the middle: functional, but still a little sentimental, a little messy, a little me.
The idea of bringing artists and fashion designers into accessibility design made complete sense. It made assistive tech feel less like “equipment” and more like something that can match someone’s personality. A prosthetic can be a tool, but it can also be a statement. A hearing aid can be medical, but it can also be stylish. That’s the kind of design I actually care about: things that work, but also let people feel like themselves.