What you say is far from being obvious. What is the ground mechanism that, according to you, will make "adversity recognize adversity even if the circumstances

What you say is far from being obvious. What is the ground mechanism that, according to you, will make "adversity recognize adversity even if the circumstances are different"? In fact, from what I see, it's usually the opposite: people who have faced adversity will have a strong bias to consider their adversity was worse than the adversity of others who face a different kind of adversity. This is the same kind of bias as "the grass is always greener ...": it is very difficult to understand the bad aspect of the situation when from the outside, and when someone has faced adversity, this will be amplified by that: they had first hand experience vs. an adversity that they need to just imagine. It reminds me of, for example, those guys who are saying "if women were whistling at me in the street, I would take it as a complement": amongst those guys, a bunch have probably faced strong adversity. Still, they cannot understand why women dislike being whistled at and jump to the conclusion that these women don't know how good they have it. The fact that they have faced adversity amplify the fact that they don't recognize adversity: "why are they telling it's adversity, they are just soft, if they lived what I've lived, they will know what real adversity is". edit: hm, while I'm not a fan of the "systemic racism" thing, depicting it as a "boogie man in the sky" does not make you look like prone to really open to understand adversity of others. I'm sure you decided that "they are just complaining, they don't know "real adversity"" while you have no idea what it is really like.