another one from The Gimp Parade
Often, the argument against compliance to the ADA is that disabled people are demanding something "extra" and their quest for equality oppresses business owners or employers who must suddenly provide something additional to the disabled person that no one else is asking for. The implied belief is that the nondisabled person never asks for anything "extra," though this is not really true. Rather, the built world is "conceived" to include the extras they might need. Lights, for example, which none of us who can see consider an extra at all, but a blind person surely doesn't need. Another "extra," as seen from a traditional male perspective is on-site daycare at work. Of course, that view involves both the conception of a world where women take care of all the children AND stay at home to do it. "Extra" is in the eye of the beholder in many instances of disability access too. [full text]