5 ms·

This isn't how I read OP's post. The OP isn't talking about a catastrophic or life-altering event which makes one a victim. Rather, being faced with difficult c

This isn't how I read OP's post. The OP isn't talking about a catastrophic or life-altering event which makes one a victim. Rather, being faced with difficult circumstances and life choices which can be altered and addressed with effort and plain hard work instead of blaming others and falling into victimhood.

anigbrowl 5y ago
While the OP might not have intended it this way, that's also a formula for perpetuating any 'difficult circumstances' that happen to be profitable for others. A simple example which was in the news this week due to a Supreme court case: crack sentencing disparities. You made a bad life choice and sold 50 grams of cocaine and got caught, you might go away for 2 years and then turn your life around. But if you sold 5 grams of crack and got caught, you were probably going away for 20 years. The penalties for crack were literally 100 times higher. Now, consuming crack is really bad for you, but consider the situation of some kid without much life experience that is tempted into making a quick buck. Depending on where they happen to be and what's in front of them, the same failure of morality/judgment would have staggeringly different consequences.
- WalterBright 5y ago
  FWIW, I strongly disagree with harsh sentences for drug crimes. I also strongly disagree with harsh sentences for juveniles - note that I qualified my statements with "adults" not children.
  - anigbrowl 5y ago
    But you're not in charge, so having nice attitudes or empathy isn't really helpful to anyone. What is helpful is to acknowledge up front that those kind of problems exist rather than being so aggressively upbeat. Your approach to dealing with life is valid, but you push it so aggressively it makes you sound like one of those yoga evangelists who is so into their thing that they lose sight of how it's not the answer to every problem.
watwut 5y ago
What the debate actually is about is whether it is possible to be subject to sexism or racism, whether those can influence outcomes and whether it is valid to talk about those. The problem is that if you state it like that, people will argue whether sexism and racism exist. So, op and the rest of HN go for the next best thing: trying to categorically deny that is is possible to be harmed by actions of others. Note how there are no complains about harm of victimhood when single guys complain about being single and blame society for it. The real topic here is that there should not be such a thing as activism. It should be shameful to talk openly talking about disadvantages or -isms. Instead, you should pretend none of that exists, so that everybody feels good about society being fair. It makes you feel safe and in control too. Bad things happen to people who deserve it.

anigbrowl 5y ago

While the OP might not have intended it this way, that's also a formula for perpetuating any 'difficult circumstances' that happen to be profitable for others. A simple example which was in the news this week due to a Supreme court case: crack sentencing disparities. You made a bad life choice and sold 50 grams of cocaine and got caught, you might go away for 2 years and then turn your life around. But if you sold 5 grams of crack and got caught, you were probably going away for 20 years. The penalties for crack were literally 100 times higher. Now, consuming crack is really bad for you, but consider the situation of some kid without much life experience that is tempted into making a quick buck. Depending on where they happen to be and what's in front of them, the same failure of morality/judgment would have staggeringly different consequences.

WalterBright 5y ago
FWIW, I strongly disagree with harsh sentences for drug crimes. I also strongly disagree with harsh sentences for juveniles - note that I qualified my statements with "adults" not children.
- anigbrowl 5y ago
  But you're not in charge, so having nice attitudes or empathy isn't really helpful to anyone. What is helpful is to acknowledge up front that those kind of problems exist rather than being so aggressively upbeat. Your approach to dealing with life is valid, but you push it so aggressively it makes you sound like one of those yoga evangelists who is so into their thing that they lose sight of how it's not the answer to every problem.

watwut 5y ago

What the debate actually is about is whether it is possible to be subject to sexism or racism, whether those can influence outcomes and whether it is valid to talk about those. The problem is that if you state it like that, people will argue whether sexism and racism exist. So, op and the rest of HN go for the next best thing: trying to categorically deny that is is possible to be harmed by actions of others. Note how there are no complains about harm of victimhood when single guys complain about being single and blame society for it. The real topic here is that there should not be such a thing as activism. It should be shameful to talk openly talking about disadvantages or -isms. Instead, you should pretend none of that exists, so that everybody feels good about society being fair. It makes you feel safe and in control too. Bad things happen to people who deserve it.