User has no status, yet



Most Recent Posts

In Endless 27 May 2017 20:32 Forum: Advanced Roleplay
I misunderstood the etiquette of sorts on this site so I had posted. But yeah, what will be will be.
Interesting bio!
In Endless 27 May 2017 20:01 Forum: Advanced Roleplay
oops, accidental post.
@The Harbinger of Ferocity

Yeah, I really do get what you're describing - the notion that there are people who would like to fein some sort of disadvantage they really do not have, and take pleasure in doing so. Particularly when people would like to - for instance - demand censorship of opinions they do not agree with because it makes them feel marginalized, and that sort of thing. I would definitely not want to encourage such a worldview as you describe.

But I don't think the current laws in my own country (the US) actively encourage this type of behavior. Society's ideas about what constitutes disadvantage or privilege are different, though (which is more what you seem to be upset with, I think). I don't think the reactionary solution to people who act irresponsibly (like you describe) is to take away protections that disadvantaged classes - like those with disabilities - have.

@The Harbinger of Ferocity

I'm guessing that people you're talking with have a different understanding of what the term "social disadvantage" means, relative to you. They probably are not saying that people with "disadvantages" can not do certain things, but relaying that it might be hard for certain groups to do certain things. If I have no legs, this doesn't mean I can't move myself, but it would be much more difficult for me relative to someone who did have legs, probably.

It's great that you could help yourself without any help, but not everyone has the same experiences. It's fine to say that the government / society shouldn't help people who "have it hard" for whatever reason, but there is a basis for it beyond personal morality. That is really my point.
E: Oops, doublepost! Argh.

I added this in post, but that question alone begs from me these thoughts, "Who determines what is or is not 'systematically disadvantaged'?", "Who decides what benefits they need in particular?", "When does someone cease being 'systematically disadvantaged'?", "Does someone who falls under multiple spectrums of 'systematic disadvantage' gain more benefits than those with fewer? Doesn't that put those people at their own disadvantage?", "What about those who are not 'systematically disadvantaged', what is their role? Do they need to take on the burden of other people? Is it by option or force?"
The Harbinger of Ferocity

I think these are all interesting questions, and I'd be happy to hear what people think of them. There is definitely an easy distinction between minority groups who are disadvantaged because they have a physical disability or handicap in the literal sense. There are other cases which are more contentious. People who have a disadvantage because of things they cannot control, like their skin color or sexual orientation, for instance.

the sake of understanding my character and thus my statement

Personal character is irrelevant, I think.

I do think grants that help people who are disadvantaged (because of economic status for instance) are a great boon to society because they allow people who are gifted to better contribute. There is definitely a pragmatic basis for 'social justice' beyond morality.
@The Harbinger of Ferocity
I asked because I don't fully understand your position, and I am trying to clarify. Since I'm not a moral realist I really do not ask questions to 'bait' people. It's just that people who tend to take the position that both individuals and government (respectively) should not cater to minorities make a caveat for those with more 'physical' disadvantages, like people with disabilities. Which I find interesting, because there is something to be said about how society and individuals look at and categorize - so to say - those things.

Anyways, I get your position now. Thanks.
In 朝代循環 25 May 2017 20:34 Forum: Casual Interest Checks
This sounds cool, I'd be interested even though my knowledge of Chinese history / epics is reaaallllyy lacking. Maybe some character inspired by Gao Xingjian's writings would work out well.


Your avatar / signature set! <3
Again, while I find the notion of "helping make people more functional" to be a nice one and what I would want to see in any circumstance, I do not believe they are obligated to, especially not by law. Hypothetically, if I owned a company and found that to be an issue - let us say the fluorescent lighting - I would purchase and maintain an alternative to it. I as the owner made that choice to accommodate people; I was not forced by the government to do so. No less, as a tax payer, even one who falls into these categories that are considered other than normal, I do not agree with paying taxes to front or enforce these changes or policies, even if they would specifically benefit me; it isn't my job or my business to do so and certainly not the average American's. It is my job as a representative of my minorities to adapt and overcome my personal difficulties.

But is it not actually the case that the populace should and does cater to minorities in order to improve society as a whole? Take the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, for instance, which prohibits the discrimination of people based on disability, which is a protected class. These types of protections do make people obligated to help facilitate people who are maybe 'less than functional', and in turn there is a benefit to society. Do you think that helping facilitate minorities who are systematically (or otherwise) disadvantaged is the job of society, not government, or?
@1nkling Do you use fountain pens? (From your signature) I love fountain pens!

Also, hi!
© 2007-2017
BBCode Cheatsheet