There is no way to measure the cost of one form of labor in comparison to another in some generalized way. Less labor simply isn’t the same direction for everyone, or even always a direction at all. Doing things faster may exhaust you longer, for example, it is always a trade off. On top of this, while many accessibility tools allow people to do things they could not otherwise, many instead allow people to do those things more safely or with another part of their body.

The key to accessibility has always been variety, being able to interact with things in as many different ways as possible. Making it simple isn’t enough, making the requirements “low” isn’t enough. You can’t demand everyone take a specific path.

I have seen this as a big issue in art, in both ways. First people saying that one type of art takes “no effort”, because they discount those types of labor. They see that one type of labor is not used that they expect, and do not realize or care that it must be replaced with another kind of labor. Different varieties of digital art often seem to experience this, especially those that don’t start out with visual work and instead start with words or equations.

Then there are people saying that other methods of art are “easy enough” to be the moral option you must pick instead. I have seen so many posts of people saying “look, this person with no hands can pick up a paintbrush, you have no excuse to not being doing that instead”.

Both of those are ableist, and sadly I see them in even “leftist” spaces all the time.