Lemmy Shitpost
Welcome to Lemmy Shitpost. Here you can shitpost to your hearts content.
Anything and everything goes. Memes, Jokes, Vents and Banter. Though we still have to comply with lemmy.world instance rules. So behave!
Rules:
1. Be Respectful
Refrain from using harmful language pertaining to a protected characteristic: e.g. race, gender, sexuality, disability or religion.
Refrain from being argumentative when responding or commenting to posts/replies. Personal attacks are not welcome here.
...
2. No Illegal Content
Content that violates the law. Any post/comment found to be in breach of common law will be removed and given to the authorities if required.
That means:
-No promoting violence/threats against any individuals
-No CSA content or Revenge Porn
-No sharing private/personal information (Doxxing)
...
3. No Spam
Posting the same post, no matter the intent is against the rules.
-If you have posted content, please refrain from re-posting said content within this community.
-Do not spam posts with intent to harass, annoy, bully, advertise, scam or harm this community.
-No posting Scams/Advertisements/Phishing Links/IP Grabbers
-No Bots, Bots will be banned from the community.
...
4. No Porn/Explicit
Content
-Do not post explicit content. Lemmy.World is not the instance for NSFW content.
-Do not post Gore or Shock Content.
...
5. No Enciting Harassment,
Brigading, Doxxing or Witch Hunts
-Do not Brigade other Communities
-No calls to action against other communities/users within Lemmy or outside of Lemmy.
-No Witch Hunts against users/communities.
-No content that harasses members within or outside of the community.
...
6. NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.
-Content that is NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.
-Content that might be distressing should be kept behind NSFW tags.
...
If you see content that is a breach of the rules, please flag and report the comment and a moderator will take action where they can.
Also check out:
Partnered Communities:
1.Memes
10.LinuxMemes (Linux themed memes)
Reach out to
All communities included on the sidebar are to be made in compliance with the instance rules. Striker
view the rest of the comments
The crazy part is it doesn't matter who you voted for, everyone on both sides would generally love to help their neighbor and would offer a hand. It's just when people get involved in the macro sense that they get filled with hate and anger. Makes me sad. Let's just all move couches.
Conservatives are often nice to people they know. The in-group. The problem is when it's a scary other. So they'll let Jose couch surf for a week while he sorts out his housing situation, because he's a good guy down on his luck, but they'll rage against Those People getting anything.
That's my understanding too. It's like empathy just ends at one's own line of sight. If I can't see it or touch it, there may be something wrong with it. It's infuriating.
Yeah, but he's different, he's not like the others that you see on the news
My FIL literally helped an undocumented Mexican who worked for him become a citizen, but is anti immigration.
Because they are chudservatives , they are only nice to people they know and like
They are hateful to people they don’t know and don’t like, people who don’t have the same opinions, and people who don’t hold the same beliefs
Can we do that without the latent ableism that comes along with it, like the idea that if you can't help people move couches then you don't deserve anyone else's help either?
This especially effects people with invisible disabilities, who are already viewed as lazy, but who also might be the most helpless when it comes to moving their own furniture.
I think it's kind of ablist to assume a disabled person has nothing of value to offer, like if they can't move a couch then they are excluded. "Moving a couch" could be anything, it could be filing taxes or cooking a meal. Disabled people are good at stuff too. I think it's really weird for you to make this assumption.
Honestly it's both. Plenty of people with disabilities have plenty to offer. A lot actually don't though, and they still deserve that helping hand.
A family aquatintance has some mental and physical disabilities. They're just not going to be able to help in any way that isn't superficial. And that's okay. Their worth isn't defined by their utility.
Attaching how worthwhile it is to help someone to their ability to provide a service inherently says the person who can't isn't worthy of help.
We should be good to people because it's the right thing to do, not out of the expectation of a future repayment. More pragmatically, we should help based on the assumption that the other person would, and that if everyone acted like that the world would be better.
I think the other person read a bit much into it, but their base point isn't wrong.
Thank you! You phrased it better than I could.
I find it wild that most people here can't see through their own assumptions. Like, everyone else needs to examine their own biases. Not them though, they could never be biased. It shows such a lack of self-awareness on their part.
My dad had a prosthetic leg, and he bristled at some of the polite or accepting ways that people would talk about disability in a way that stuck with me because he explained it. Basically a dislike of "handicapable" or the notion that you "make up for it" in other ways. To paraphrase: "getting my foot cut off in a car accident didn't come with some perk that balanced things out".
I think a lot of the pushback you got came not from a place of rejecting that they could have a bias, but from the topic being broached as a confrontation of bias instead of an explanation of ignorance.
People, like the poster above, who are being conscientious according to their understanding will get indignant or frustrated when that's met with an unmatched response.
Assuming positive intent colors implicit "positive abelism", or other "positive -isms" that I'm personally less knowledgeable about, as unfamiliarity or ignorance rather than callousness or rudeness.
In those cases, the person is very unlikely to disagree or pushback if informed about their blind spot. The key part in their head was "disabled people are just as important", sitting right next to "good people chip in and contribute". So they respond to "disabled people can't always contribute" with "disabled people are important!" phrased as "disabled people can contribute!”.
Addressing it as a bias against disabled people doesn't fit because that part is correct. Need to address it at where the problem is: a misconception about the relationship between human worth, labor and utility.
I agree. Even if the task at hand really is moving a couch, coordinatin, organising, etc. are crucial contributions that dont require physical strength or ableness to do.
Just because you can't lift the couch doesn't mean you can't help. Someone has to pick up the beer, someone has to drive the truck. Someone needs to hold the doors while they carry it in, someone needs to know a guy who can help, the list of things goes on for miles.
What I think is ableist is that you would try to pretend that disabled people don't get excluded due to society devaluing the things they can offer.
It's also ableist for you to suggest that a disabled person should be expected to file someone else's taxes if they need help moving furniture.
You just gave a master class in missing the point.
The same way it isn't about the couch, it isn't about the taxes
To each according to their means, to each according to their needs was
Or in brocialism terms "Autism be damned my boy can work a grill"
Every metaphor breaks down if you read it at face value
Okay, that's fine and all, but "brocialism" will never be enough because it depends so strongly on a person's personal connection. It's not "to each accord to their needs" it's "to each according to their connections."
If you don't see how that disproportionally benefits and privileges in-groups then I don't know how much clearer I can break it down for you. A socialist society needs mechanisms in place to take care of those who would be forgotten by "brocialism" alone.
Maybe the system works for autistic people who can grill, but what about autistic people who can spend two hours explaining the history of North Rhine-Westphalia or Star Trek lore or any other special interest? You think someone with a truck will view that as an equivalent exchange?
Mind you, I'm not saying their talents are worthless. I'm telling you my experience as a neurodivergent person that most people view these things as lacking value and will marginalize anyone whose contributions consist exclusively of talents that most people consider worthless.
Assuming every autistic person can grill or contribute something that neurotypical people value as having worth is wrong because it marginalizes those who fall outside of that limited group, and because it reinforces the system and the idea that people need to be able to contribute something deemed valuable before they deserve to receive help.
And if you can't see how that disadvantages the people whose disabilities are the most severe, then I don't know what will get through to you.
Show me one part of humanity's development that did not involve social connection. You, as a human being are part of an unbroken chain of social connections spanning back so far that there isn't even a word for how many generations it is.
You're still focusing too much on the minutiae of the reference not the meaning behind it, its not about the grilling the same way it's not about the truck, the same way small talk isn't about the weather.
To use your own words
ITS ABOUT MAKING A CONNECTION WITH ANOTHER HUMAN BEING AND DISCOVERING THAT NOT EVERYONE IS A CUNT.
I have fully ND mates, who have special interests that they have built communities around. One of whom was genuinely incapable of spending time out in public without being in full body attack mode after less than an hour is now entirely able to spend an entire day out at a festival AND maintain enough social battery to continue spending time with friends well into the evening. Something they have fully admitted to me would not be possible five years ago.
Some people enjoy conversation. Some people are bad at using maps. Some people need to be able to speak out their thoughts aloud to even begin to analyse them and require a rubberduck that can ask questions.
"Something deemed valuable" can have many meanings to many people, but you'll never find out what they deem valuable by mentally labelling them as a degenerate that should not be interacted with the second they say something you disagree with.
Are you suggesting that makes it okay to forget about outsiders? Because if that's what you believe, then I challenge you to explain what makes xenophobia wrong without contradicting that sentiment that you're relying on so heavily.
You're saying I'm focusing too much on the minutiae, but you're the one that keeps bringing up minutiae of examples and anecdotes as if that changes anything. Ray Charles was a blind Black man, but he was also a successful musician. I don't think anyone in their right mind would use that to argue that blind black men shouldn't require additional assistance and accomodations that most don't.
You know neurodivergent people with this-or-that talent? That's great for them. BUT NOT EVERYBODY HAS THAT. And you can list as many examples as you want about such-and-such thing a person can do to help out in exchange for someone else's help, but the more examples you list, the more you marginalize people who either can't do those things, or can't find someone who's willing to help them out in the way that they need in exchange for one of those things that they happen to also be able to do.
Why would your first assumption be that I'm excluding everybody that doesn't fit into the niche?
For clarity, if you want me to pass your purity test by telling you that Xenophobia makes about as much sense as stapling your genitals to a 2x4 and swinging said 2x4 at a hornet's nest, since we're ALL GOD DAMN HUMAN BEINGS THAT DESERVE RESPECT AND HELP WHEN NEEDED EVEN IF THEY ARE SHITTY.
Who's arguing that? We're talking about sharing what abilities we do have for the greater good, in this one tiny example posted- where one person has a truck, another has a need for a truck. They, as human beings, understand that helping people feels good, so they help each other in exchange for a 'peppercorn' payment of either a shared drink/a pizza/the acknowledgment of being the one that provides help the next time. (Based on the last line about the guys with the truck noticing he was strong for his size, they knew he was capable and wouldn't have asked something of him beyond his ability, because that's rude.)
So you're assuming that I'm saying people that can't pay through any means don't deserve help? You REALLY think that about a stranger you know nothing about.
Have you heard of the concept of goodwill? Of helping someone out for the entirely selfish reason of 'helping people feels good and it makes me feel good'?
Do you know that there are volunteers currently digging people (people that couldn't ever repay them, some of whom are children, many of whom will become disabled as a result.) out of the rubble that was once their home at great personal risk from either falling debris or from further attacks that led to the homes being destroyed?
But please tell me how the examples that I'm providing are exclusive and how they're not non-exhaustive examples of ways that human beings help one another.
Wow, crystal clear logic you've got there. You struggle to even formulate a basic argument and yet you have the gall to accuse me of purity testing?
If you don't see how xenophobia connects to the exclusion of outsiders in smalltown, usa, then it's honestly hopeless to try explaining to you.
I'm not assuming that about you. I'm telling you that this kind of thing happens. And you continue to act like it doesn't by pretending it's so audacious of me to point it out.
That's not AT ALL what I'm saying, and you're twisting my words around on their head so hard that I almost think it has to be disingenuous.
Literally my whole point is that those people DO deserve help, but that in this system where people depend on the goodwill of others, some people will be excluded because in many cases people's goodwill is either lacking, incomplete, or exclusionary.
The examples you list have no bearing on it because I'm NOT SAYING that nobody has goodwill or does things for altruistic reasons. What I'm saying is that relying on that alone as a society to get everyone the help that they need IS NOT ENOUGH, because too many people LACK THAT GOODWILL.
If you think those rescue efforts have nearly as much support and funding as they need, then you must not have ever been involved in anything of the kind, because almost always they have to do more with less. They could certainly always use more volunteers, more donations, but as I stated before THIS ALONE WILL NEVER BE ENOUGH, because GOODWILL IS NOT AS COMMON AS YOU PRESUME.
All of those efforts would be much better served by state-sponsored IGOs and NGOs that can do high-level coordination and collect and distribute the vast resources needed to bring these rescue efforts and reconstruction projects to completion. And instead of relying SOLELY on volunteers and hoping enough people care enough to make those sacrifices, instead there should be government-sponsored workforces whose entire jobs, training, and expertise revolves around providing the necessary labor. Because even though volunteering is great, it's simply NOT ENOUGH.
How much clearer can I make that for you?
My partner has disabilities and so they do not help lift the sofa. But they are a lot better at driving a manual truck than I am, so with a few pillows and adaptations in the driver's cab that is what they do when someone needs a sofa moved. Some disabilities prevent you from driving the truck too, but it's important as a group of sofa movers to make sure that everyone has something they can fulfill, even if that means planning the move. That can be incredibly helpful.
Cool thing about being disabled is you become the one who knows the people with a truck and a couple 20-year old children. Or the person who cuts hair for free. Or the person whose cousin does pro bono legal work for certain requests.
In short, you become the key connector in that network: the Guy Who Knows A Guy.
It sounds like you're putting a lot of weight in your own experience and assuming every disabled person will have the same experience.
Maybe you or someone you know is disabled and is that connector who knows a guy. But projecting that and assuming every other disabled person will have that same advantage is a wild thing to do, and I'm surprised that more people don't see through that.
It's less an advantage and more a necessity. You either become the person who knows people who can do things or certain things don't get done.
Yes, you're right about that. And that's precisely why people who can't form those connections are at such a disadvantage.
My wife has a physical disability, she is an "asker", as in knows she will need help from others and so will ask random people, and also connects a lot of people together. Maybe not everyone becomes that, but it sort of forces you to.
Why is everyone relying so hard on using specific counterexamples as a counterargument?
Counterexamples only refute absolute statements. If I said "no one with a disability can find the help they need in this kind of system," then sure, listing a few people with disabilities who do find the help they need would be enough to refute that statement.
But that's not what I'm saying. What I'm saying is "not everyone (including, but not limited to people with disabilities) can find the help they need in this kind of system."
It's a completely different statement, because it's not an absolute. I'm not saying that no exceptions exist. I'm saying that exceptions do exist to the opposite statement, i.e. "everyone (including people with disabilities) can find the help they beed in this kind of system." Which, by the way, is an absolute statement.
So in fact I'm the one arguing against an absolute, and people try refuting me as if I'm stating an absolute when I'm not.
And unless anyone wants to argue that every single person in this system is able to find the help they need when they need it, then there's really no way to argue against my point, because my entire point is simply that that's not true. There are people who get left out, and any attempt to claim otherwise is erasure.
You better come with some jokes then. When I'm moving some bulky furniture upstairs and really not having a good time, sometimes a well-timed joke is exactly what we need to drop it and injure ourselves.
Was this supposed to be an attempt at a joke?
If you want to be included by people, try to be less of a dick.
This isn't me talking about the wider disabled community, of which I am part of, when I say this btw, this is me talking to you.
[Deleted duplicate]
Kevin and Tony would definitely move a sofa for a person with disabilities. No doubt in my mind. They'd still expect pizza and beer tho, that's non-negotiable.
Okay well what about when they ask that person later if they'll help move Tony's fridge? Like this un-negotiated yet obligatory repayment. If you say "sorry, I can't" then they'll immediately lose respect for you, and probably tell everyone they know not to help you in the future. Even if you explain that you have a condition that prevents you, if that condition isn't visible to them they'll think you're just selfish and making excuses.
Also, are you willing to guarantee that Kevin and Tony aren't racist or homophobic? Are you willing to guarantee they would help move a sofa for someone who's gay or black? This is about more than just disabilities.
This is about "good ole boy" culture and relying on the benevolence and altruism of people who likely as not only care about helping people they view as a part of their in-group. And if you think that's not a real problem in america, then you must not live here because it's literally all over the place here.
Maybe they'd judge you, maybe they wouldn't. No way of knowing. Sorry that you feel so mistreated by hypothetical strangers. I wasn't attempting to drum up any sort of trauma for you. I'm sending some lovingkindness out into the world for all living beings right now, and I hope you can get a little hit of it too. Be well.