Frustrated with "Disability"

Early on in the piece, Mairs signaled how her essay will be about how "physical disability loons pretty large in one's life." (14). I was interested to see how she would go about answering the question every author is asked of by a reader: "Why should I care about the words you write?". I was dissapointed with Mairs response because she took the easy answer out. She chose her final persuasive punch to be an appeal to fear, warning, "this denial of disability imperils even you who are able-bodied" (15). This quote stands out to me because as much as Mairs claims disability is a minority of its own, she certainly did not argue like a minority. A Black or Hispanic or Asian minority member surely could not have argued for his or her people's fair representation under the media citing "Temporarily White-Persons" or some other egregious soundbite. And that is frustrating to me. I am not opposed to Mairs using "TAPs" as a one of her arguments, but not as the argument she chooses to conclude her essay with; to grace with the holiness of the last paragraph. Mairs hit many important and usable clincher arguments in her essay, spanning from the hollow TV woman who surrenders her independence, the self-degradation and isolation that comes with being a minority or the sense of not existing or mattering. My question is, would it mean that if her readers were not at risk of spontaneous disability Mairs argument need not apply to them?