4 ms·
So it was a common practice a century before the photo was taken. How is it surprising that people get upset? The photo is a record of a depiction of a practic
by kubb 1y ago
So it was a common practice a century before the photo was taken.
How is it surprising that people get upset? The photo is a record of a depiction of a practice that existed.
It’s the practice that people don’t like, not the depiction.
- fyrn_ 1y agoPart of why people are upsetis because they think this is a much more recent example of the thing they dislike than expected. It's disingenuous to pretend it's only the practice not the context which influences people.
- kubb 1y agoSure, context matters. You could claim "there were no 3 year olds ACTUALLY working as chimney sweeps anywhere in the world in 1930", if you wanted to make this point. But, I suspect it's not so clear if that's even true, just as the author can only suspect this is a reenactment in this photo.
- Jolter 1y agoI think you’ll find they the article makes some very good arguments for why this is indeed a reenactment. I think the best argument is that three year olds would make extremely ineffective chimney sweeps. I don’t know if you’ve met any recently? They would require more effort in supervision than they save by way of their labor. Much more.
- gambiting 1y agoWell but it's posted as a real thing, not a re-enactment. It's dishonest at its core. Especially since it says it's as recent as 1930 which is just straight up not true. It's like if we reenacted it in 2025 and said "look at this toddler chimney sweep in 2025!". Obviously part of the outrage would be at the practice, part of it would be at the fact that it's in 2025.
- kubb 1y agoActually, I take back what I said. The article doesn't even conclusively demonstrate that this is a reenactment.
- Thorrez 1y agoWell a law was passed 30 years earlier making it illegal.
- Thorrez 1y agoIt wasn't common practice for 3-year-olds to do it. The article says usually 6 was the youngest.