3 ms·

I feel like there's this weird preciousness fetish that comes up around hardship. "Oh, you poor thing! Life must be so difficult and interesting for you. Please

I feel like there's this weird preciousness fetish that comes up around hardship. "Oh, you poor thing! Life must be so difficult and interesting for you. Please, tell me about your struggles, preferably in 15-20 minutes while alternating personal anecdotes with general observations about society." I see this in how we think about disability, but also poorer countries, where the gold standard is the noble African tribeswoman, carrying water for her family, living in a hut, eating soup made of sticks or whatever. Shame she has a cellphone and wears a t-shirt. It kinda ruins the magic. And I think deep down we want that magic, the idea that things could be so different for us that we try to amplify differences beyond understanding and into caricature. It's hard to believe that if we were in a wheelchair, or carrying water every day past all the World Vision cameras, it would just be mundane for us. How's things, N'gatu? Oh, y'know, carrying water again. Same old grind. It would be harmless enough, except that you really want to be firing on all cylinders against hardship and deprivation. These aren't problems that need wide-eyed mysticism or hand-wringing sympathy. They need pragmatism. Why is someone in a wheelchair disabled? It's not because they can't walk, it's because they can't walk in a world that expects them to walk. If they went through a portal to nobody-has-working-legs-Earth, they'd fit right in. But of course, on that Earth stairs would never have been invented. The nobody-has-working-legs-Earth scientists would have been hard at it on wheels and ramps from day one. Which isn't to say someone with legs would be just as disabled in that world or some nonsense like that. Legs are better than no legs. But also being able to fly or see infrared is better than being stuck here on the ground with nothing but the boring visible spectrum to watch. Without society as a reference, there's no disability, just degrees of ability. And more is still better. So finally we come to enhancement. Technology enhances a paraplegic into a person with wheels for legs, the same way it enhances N'gatu into a person with a detachable water stomach, and the same way it enhances you into a person whose hydration comes through a vast external network of water arteries. There's nothing mystical about any of these examples; it's just ability being enhanced by technology. So I think we could do a lot worse than just taking disability to mean "has the most to gain from technology". I mean, I'd gain a lot from a jetpack and infrared contact lenses, but if my quality of life could be significantly improved by an inclined plane, well, that sounds like the definition of an easy win.

carlmr 9y ago
>poorer countries, where the gold standard is the noble African tribeswoman, carrying water for her family, living in a hut, eating soup made of sticks or whatever. Shame she has a cellphone and wears a t-shirt. It kinda ruins the magic. I've traveled quite a bit in recent years, and there are quite a lot of fellow travelers who express something like this. Oh it's so sad that we can't see the REAL China anymore. Or something of the sort. Like other people are just their for your entertainment. Don't get me wrong, I'd like to have a time machine and visit ancient China, but there's a severe disconnect if you think people should continue living a certain way to fulfill your stereotypes.
- johnsonjo 9y ago
  I was going to comment on that statement as well. > I see this in how we think about disability, but also poorer countries, where the gold standard is the noble African tribeswoman, carrying water for her family, living in a hut, eating soup made of sticks or whatever. Shame she has a cellphone and wears a t-shirt. It kinda ruins the magic. I lived in the Philippines for over a year and my first sixth months I lived in a pretty rural area where most people had dirt floors and bamboo/cinder-block houses. I believe some of them had cell phones but not all of them. The interesting thing about the above quote to me is that though people live in such humble circumstances that doesn’t necessarily make life more miserable for them then for you and I. Some of those people I met in those circumstances were very happy people. They may not have the same things, but the things they have like family they hold dear. On a tangent, I think the principle behind the article’s solution (basically that we should not pity and should help by building ramps) is the difference between empathy and sympathy. Like it was stated earlier in the comments we need to put ourselves in other people’s shoes and see if they have any problems with their situation. Once you know and they know you know there is a problem then you can go about expressing your concern for them or providing a solution. The problem with just giving pity outright is shown in the article.

carlmr 9y ago

>poorer countries, where the gold standard is the noble African tribeswoman, carrying water for her family, living in a hut, eating soup made of sticks or whatever. Shame she has a cellphone and wears a t-shirt. It kinda ruins the magic. I've traveled quite a bit in recent years, and there are quite a lot of fellow travelers who express something like this. Oh it's so sad that we can't see the REAL China anymore. Or something of the sort. Like other people are just their for your entertainment. Don't get me wrong, I'd like to have a time machine and visit ancient China, but there's a severe disconnect if you think people should continue living a certain way to fulfill your stereotypes.

johnsonjo 9y ago
I was going to comment on that statement as well. > I see this in how we think about disability, but also poorer countries, where the gold standard is the noble African tribeswoman, carrying water for her family, living in a hut, eating soup made of sticks or whatever. Shame she has a cellphone and wears a t-shirt. It kinda ruins the magic. I lived in the Philippines for over a year and my first sixth months I lived in a pretty rural area where most people had dirt floors and bamboo/cinder-block houses. I believe some of them had cell phones but not all of them. The interesting thing about the above quote to me is that though people live in such humble circumstances that doesn’t necessarily make life more miserable for them then for you and I. Some of those people I met in those circumstances were very happy people. They may not have the same things, but the things they have like family they hold dear. On a tangent, I think the principle behind the article’s solution (basically that we should not pity and should help by building ramps) is the difference between empathy and sympathy. Like it was stated earlier in the comments we need to put ourselves in other people’s shoes and see if they have any problems with their situation. Once you know and they know you know there is a problem then you can go about expressing your concern for them or providing a solution. The problem with just giving pity outright is shown in the article.