I have once been told that I'm wrong for thinking that someone who wants to be "cured" of a condition that either 1: Makes them slightly different from normal humans in a way that is only cosmetic, not better or worse than the average, or 2: actively gives them superhuman attributes or otherwise is mostly beneficial to them, while people who do suffer problems related to the condition tend to only have the problems becuase of outside factors(such as brain damage or someone else being a prick) and that can easily be managed(such as by wearing thin gloves) and eventually treated(IE, longer needing to "manage" it becuase the problems went away) with a treatment that implicitly or explicitly causes severe brain damage is mentally ill and that in general a drug that's designed to "cure" a condition that for the most part just makes you "different in a way that doesn't hurt anyone" is inherently offensive if referred to as a cure.

I was also told that thinking that makes me as bad as that militant "deaf pride" movement that thinks not being able to hear makes you superior to everyone, that curing deafness is genocide, and that it's okay to refuse to let your children get treatments to restore their hearing.

Becuase refusing to be cured of a legitimate disability out of misplaced feelings of superiority is exactly the same as not wanting to deliberately inflict severe brain damage on yourself to get rid of legitimate superpowers.