I hope I’m not ruffling any feathers or being too controversial here, but I think one of the biggest problems we have in the world today is a tendency for people to shut out views that run counter to their own or to the prevailing view of a group with which they identify. So I’m just going to offer a different perspective for people to chew on.
For the sake of the argument, let’s substitute “sexism” for “ableism”. Now let’s say some some gender studies professor writes a paper that declares something – it doesn’t matter what it is so we’ll call it X – some action, word, social phenomenon, whatever, as sexist. If a man disagrees with this on its merits and offers a counterargument, he will invariably be accused of protecting his own privilege, and not having an opinion worth considering simply due to the fact that he is a man. This allows the proponents of the “X is sexist” theory to avoid defending their idea to a full half of the population. If a woman disagrees with the thesis, though, it’s a bit trickier. In order to avoid debate, you have to accuse her of suffering from the equivalent of a type of battered wives syndrome or stockholm syndrome, that she has been so traumatized by a lifetime of oppression that she has come to identify with her oppressors. Therefore her opinion is compromised. This leaves nobody left to argue – nothing to debate. X is sexist, because we say so.
So, to me, “internalized ableism” is a convenient way to dismiss the perspective of people with disabilities who might have a nuanced or dispassionate view on a controversial subject having to do with disability – especially one with political overtones.
But this is probably just my internalized ableism speaking…