4 ms·

Other users take note: this commenter frequently makes arguments that are so off-base, that I'm convinced they're either a bad-faith troll, or unwilling to actu

Other users take note: this commenter frequently makes arguments that are so off-base, that I'm convinced they're either a bad-faith troll, or unwilling to actually think about the discussion at hand. Take that into account when reading this thread.

quantumBerry 5y ago
By the commenter, you must be referring to yourself. Over half of the working age disabled were employed before the passing of the ADA and that number went down after the passing of the ADA. Seeing as being employed often (but not always) involves going into public, and is a key measure of integration with the public, I'd say the disabled were far from "pretty much" not going anywhere in public before passing of the ADA. In fact one could argue the ADA harmed integration in public of the disabled by the side effect that it lowered their employment.
- salt-thrower 5y ago
  And yet instead of leading with that, you led the argument with "well the President of the country was able to get around so you're wrong." And anyway, employment rate alone is one tiny sliver of the puzzle. A thousand factors influence employment rates, and general quality of life factors such as "I can navigate public spaces without someone lifting my chair up the stairs" are not measured by employment. Further, the ADA was one example of activism making at least a slight improvement in the physical public conditions that people have to put up with. That was my point. All I'm saying is you don't have to just bow your head and accept the conditions that normative society thrusts upon you if you're atypical in some way. Activism can move the needle in a more accessible direction. Perhaps you can think of some better examples of this than the ADA.
  - quantumBerry 5y ago
    I have no disagreement with this well reasoned statement.

4 ms·

Other users take note: this commenter frequently makes arguments that are so off-base, that I'm convinced they're either a bad-faith troll, or unwilling to actu

by salt-thrower 5y ago

quantumBerry 5y ago
By the commenter, you must be referring to yourself. Over half of the working age disabled were employed before the passing of the ADA and that number went down after the passing of the ADA. Seeing as being employed often (but not always) involves going into public, and is a key measure of integration with the public, I'd say the disabled were far from "pretty much" not going anywhere in public before passing of the ADA. In fact one could argue the ADA harmed integration in public of the disabled by the side effect that it lowered their employment.
- salt-thrower 5y ago
  And yet instead of leading with that, you led the argument with "well the President of the country was able to get around so you're wrong." And anyway, employment rate alone is one tiny sliver of the puzzle. A thousand factors influence employment rates, and general quality of life factors such as "I can navigate public spaces without someone lifting my chair up the stairs" are not measured by employment. Further, the ADA was one example of activism making at least a slight improvement in the physical public conditions that people have to put up with. That was my point. All I'm saying is you don't have to just bow your head and accept the conditions that normative society thrusts upon you if you're atypical in some way. Activism can move the needle in a more accessible direction. Perhaps you can think of some better examples of this than the ADA.
  - quantumBerry 5y ago
    I have no disagreement with this well reasoned statement.