6 ms·

Did you actually read that comment about Toronto? He immediately prefaces it by saying it isn't in the same realm, but can relate because he's poor in his area

Did you actually read that comment about Toronto? He immediately prefaces it by saying it isn't in the same realm, but can relate because he's poor in his area as well. I don't think that YOU realize that it is okay to relate to common feelings without being the most of that thing. The guy from Toronto doesn't have to be the most poor person in the most poor area in order to understand their feelings and talk about his. You're gatekeeping being poor. What a weird thing to be elitist about.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
sombremesa 5y ago
> Did you actually read that comment about Toronto? I did. Now that you have that information, perhaps you can actually read what I wrote.
- jimbob21 5y ago
  Sure. > will reduce the comments I see on the internet that try and compare Delhi/Mumbai squalor to LA You want to reduce comments comparing your city's poorness to another city's poorness. > It's not really enough...you should experience it for yourself You're saying I can't talk about poor areas I know about because they're not as poor as your city. That's gatekeeping being poor, plain as day. But more than that, it totally shuts down all conversation about why your city might be so poor. What is happening in your advanced poor city that isn't happening in other cities?
  - sombremesa 5y ago
    > You want to reduce comments comparing your city's poorness to another city's poorness. Not exactly. My bad, perhaps I should've provided an example of the kind of comment I'm talking about. I can't be arsed to go find that comment right now but it's about this video: https://www.news18.com/news/buzz/video-of-man-eating-animal-carcass-on-delhi-jaipur-highway-explains-the-extent-of-locdown-crisis-2631829.html https://www.news18.com/news/buzz/video-of-man-eating-animal-... The comment I'm talking about begins with (iirc) "The same thing is happening in LA..." I don't know what chip you have on your shoulder about this "gatekeeping" but I wish you luck and hope that these things aren't happening in your cities, but of course you have the freedom to say that they are regardless. I want to add something: I'm just against saying that these things are the same. I'm not saying anything about better or worse or that poverty isn't poverty. Given a choice I might rather be the average homeless person in India as opposed to LA, because at least I wouldn't be as likely to be there due to crippling addictions or mental illness. That's why I compared it to languages, I don't think one established language is objectively better or worse than another, but direct translations rarely work well.
chinchilla2020 5y ago
He is not gatekeeping being poor. He is pointing out that being poor in Toronto is not the same as being poor in Delhi. You are trying to lump two things together into a category that are not even remotely comparable.
- derefr 5y ago
  There are two distinct experiences being discussed here: the experience of living in absolute poverty; and the experience of being down-and-out in a city you can't afford the cost-of-living of (i.e. "relative" poverty — the kind you could in theory get away from by "moving somewhere cheaper", but where for various reasons people don't tend to do that.) Both the poor person in Toronto and the poor person in Delhi are in relative poverty, and have the lived experiences of relative poverty in common. And also, the lived experiences of relative poverty are usually what someone means when they talk about "being poor." If you live in Dubai and make $50k/yr, but that doesn't even get you a crappy apartment two hours away from work, so you have to sleep in your car; and all your money is going to paying for groceries in a city that has to import all its food, and for car insurance that costs more than your car, so you don't have any savings — then you're poor, by most people's definition! But of course, only the homeless person in Delhi experiences absolute poverty. They have two problems: relative poverty, and absolute poverty. But the homeless person in Delhi will still commisserate with the homeless person in Toronto over the lived experiences and troubles that come from relative poverty — a problem they both share — even if the homeless person in Toronto doesn't know anything about what living with absolute poverty is like. They both still get their meagre possessions stolen if they stop watching them for a few minutes. They both sleep rough and have to actively think about how to not die when there's a heat wave or a cold spell. They both probably have a fungal infection somewhere on their bodies from their clothes being damp all the dang time. Etc.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - sombremesa 5y ago
    > But the homeless person in Delhi will still commisserate with the homeless person in Toronto Perhaps, but it's worth pointing out that these experiences are qualitatively different. In India, being poor (especially if you're a certain caste) is tantamount to being non-human. You can be jailed, raped, mistreated, killed without consequence. Even the middle class is afforded little human dignity, the underclass have no real hope. The homeless in Toronto can still get some government services without bribery. On top of that, there's the whole matter of caste which won't go away even if you win the lottery. Someone else here is saying that dating poor in Switzerland is the same as in Delhi...that comes across as unbelievably tone deaf. Perhaps they missed the part in TFA where this couple has to date far away from the home. You can get beaten up or killed for being seen with the "wrong person" (in this case same gotra), and it does happen - quite often. So it's not as simple as absolute and relative poverty in my opinion (though that is a good thought and is definitely part of it). Risking another bad analogy, I would perhaps compare it to being the lowest class of worker in a Walmart versus being at the bottom of the org chart in Netflix. You can both commiserate on how bad your managers are, but your lived experiences are not remotely the same.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

sombremesa 5y ago

> Did you actually read that comment about Toronto? I did. Now that you have that information, perhaps you can actually read what I wrote.

jimbob21 5y ago
Sure. > will reduce the comments I see on the internet that try and compare Delhi/Mumbai squalor to LA You want to reduce comments comparing your city's poorness to another city's poorness. > It's not really enough...you should experience it for yourself You're saying I can't talk about poor areas I know about because they're not as poor as your city. That's gatekeeping being poor, plain as day. But more than that, it totally shuts down all conversation about why your city might be so poor. What is happening in your advanced poor city that isn't happening in other cities?
- sombremesa 5y ago
  > You want to reduce comments comparing your city's poorness to another city's poorness. Not exactly. My bad, perhaps I should've provided an example of the kind of comment I'm talking about. I can't be arsed to go find that comment right now but it's about this video: https://www.news18.com/news/buzz/video-of-man-eating-animal-carcass-on-delhi-jaipur-highway-explains-the-extent-of-locdown-crisis-2631829.html https://www.news18.com/news/buzz/video-of-man-eating-animal-... The comment I'm talking about begins with (iirc) "The same thing is happening in LA..." I don't know what chip you have on your shoulder about this "gatekeeping" but I wish you luck and hope that these things aren't happening in your cities, but of course you have the freedom to say that they are regardless. I want to add something: I'm just against saying that these things are the same. I'm not saying anything about better or worse or that poverty isn't poverty. Given a choice I might rather be the average homeless person in India as opposed to LA, because at least I wouldn't be as likely to be there due to crippling addictions or mental illness. That's why I compared it to languages, I don't think one established language is objectively better or worse than another, but direct translations rarely work well.

chinchilla2020 5y ago

He is not gatekeeping being poor. He is pointing out that being poor in Toronto is not the same as being poor in Delhi. You are trying to lump two things together into a category that are not even remotely comparable.

derefr 5y ago
There are two distinct experiences being discussed here: the experience of living in absolute poverty; and the experience of being down-and-out in a city you can't afford the cost-of-living of (i.e. "relative" poverty — the kind you could in theory get away from by "moving somewhere cheaper", but where for various reasons people don't tend to do that.) Both the poor person in Toronto and the poor person in Delhi are in relative poverty, and have the lived experiences of relative poverty in common. And also, the lived experiences of relative poverty are usually what someone means when they talk about "being poor." If you live in Dubai and make $50k/yr, but that doesn't even get you a crappy apartment two hours away from work, so you have to sleep in your car; and all your money is going to paying for groceries in a city that has to import all its food, and for car insurance that costs more than your car, so you don't have any savings — then you're poor, by most people's definition! But of course, only the homeless person in Delhi experiences absolute poverty. They have two problems: relative poverty, and absolute poverty. But the homeless person in Delhi will still commisserate with the homeless person in Toronto over the lived experiences and troubles that come from relative poverty — a problem they both share — even if the homeless person in Toronto doesn't know anything about what living with absolute poverty is like. They both still get their meagre possessions stolen if they stop watching them for a few minutes. They both sleep rough and have to actively think about how to not die when there's a heat wave or a cold spell. They both probably have a fungal infection somewhere on their bodies from their clothes being damp all the dang time. Etc.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- sombremesa 5y ago
  > But the homeless person in Delhi will still commisserate with the homeless person in Toronto Perhaps, but it's worth pointing out that these experiences are qualitatively different. In India, being poor (especially if you're a certain caste) is tantamount to being non-human. You can be jailed, raped, mistreated, killed without consequence. Even the middle class is afforded little human dignity, the underclass have no real hope. The homeless in Toronto can still get some government services without bribery. On top of that, there's the whole matter of caste which won't go away even if you win the lottery. Someone else here is saying that dating poor in Switzerland is the same as in Delhi...that comes across as unbelievably tone deaf. Perhaps they missed the part in TFA where this couple has to date far away from the home. You can get beaten up or killed for being seen with the "wrong person" (in this case same gotra), and it does happen - quite often. So it's not as simple as absolute and relative poverty in my opinion (though that is a good thought and is definitely part of it). Risking another bad analogy, I would perhaps compare it to being the lowest class of worker in a Walmart versus being at the bottom of the org chart in Netflix. You can both commiserate on how bad your managers are, but your lived experiences are not remotely the same.