

she thinks i’m disgusting or inferior because of my disabilities.
If she said this to me, this bit right here is the “full stop” where I would have cut ties with her and she’d be gone from my life. At best she may be younger, and this may have been said as a tantrum of someone too young. She may grow out of it, but its not my job to “fix” her. There is much better use of my time, effort, and empathy with anyone else but this person. Its also possible this is who she is.
The result is the same: I’d simply never interact or talk to her again, and move on with my life. There are literally billions of other people in the world that aren’t this person. I’d like to get to know those other people instead.
Your thesis missed one important element right here:
Practically or legally speaking there isn’t a restriction of creativity. Its a restriction on the ability to profit from that creativity or negatively affect the profits of the rights holder with your work using their name.
If you call yourself the Burger King in your kitchen, there’s no trademark infringement there. However, if you start selling you food and calling yourself the Burger King, then that is a trademark violation. If you want to write Twilight fan fiction using the characters and story lines from the books, you’re free to do so. There is no copyright violation. However, if you want to profit from your expansions to another author’s work, you have to rename the characters and setting and call it “Fifty shades of grey”.
I’ll agree with this though. Large rights holders have been able to get changes to law that exceed the original IP mandates. This means extensions wildly beyond what was reasonable before, or getting things protected by IP law that are questionable at best.