I’m assuming even the people who agree with you hate the way you’re approaching this. I hope you’re just a troll, because the alternative is that you’re an idiot.
There is much to say about reporting biases, but in this case you’re touching one of the most humane services only the most progressive countries have touched on. The ability to pass away in a respectful way on your own terms. No one is being forced or pressured, that’s a blatant lie many media channels are responsible for.
You don’t choose to be born, if you feel your life is unbearable/complete you should be able to step out of it without having to be kept alive by pills and/or treatments while slowly deteriorating mentally/physically. And don’t get me started on the uncertain outcome and dramatic outcome of suicide, which is usually an insane ‘counter-argument’ that gets proposed as available option.
Sadly many countries have not yet reached that level of sympathy, mainly because of religious intervention. Which is exactly the point of this post.
Check out his (and Andy and Matt’s) podcast “probably science” it’s a wonderful way to get all the poop, flatulence, and penis science your brain could ask for. They occasionally have on great guests, and (almost) always have interesting people doing the show with them.
Also he is great on Twitter, but usually deletes his posts after they get over x amount of views/shares, because he isn’t into going viral.
Also, please bring back Jesse vs cancer, it’s been over a year guy.
Idk, man. Finland has been posting some Ls recently. The Orpo Cabinet is all about those tax cuts, business-friendly deregulations, big new military spending budgets, and tighter restrictions on immigration.
Maybe I misunderstood you but I’m talking about Finland. We didn’t drop any bombs. We’re just reacting to Russian attack on Ukraine and them using refugees as tools.
That’s fair but it’s also not the point of the post which is the us rolling back the laws that help people. Your just keeping an ultra narrow focus because you think it’s helping hide that fact
While the wikipedia page you cite does have a section heading called “1945-1992”, that’s only because it uses WW2 and the EU treaty as endpoints. Not because laws were being passed in 1945. Moreover, the cited page doesn’t list country-level laws in 1945-1992, it lists international treaties; and the earliest listed treaty is from 1953.
What? Europe very sound protection for the disabled. Putside of historical buildings built before disability care you won’t find better access anywhere.
I get America is pretty good too, but your comment makes it sound like Europe is a nightmare for the disabled.
Not sure about how good or bad it is in the US, but in the Netherlands (a place that is known for good infrastructure) it’s definitely not perfect.
I never realised until we got a baby and I started walking with a stroler. Way too often the sidewalk is inaccessible because of cars or bicycles. Also lots of places without ramps or elevators.
Europe very sound protection for the disabled. Putside of historical buildings built before disability care you won’t find better access anywhere.
But that’s the point: Most buildings were built before disability care, and haven’t been upgraded.* Think about your favorite restaurant, bar, kebab place, corner shop etc. – I don’t think any of mine are wheelchair accessible. Also good luck taking a train in Germany, where many platforms aren’t wheelchair accessible and they might or might not have a lift to get you into the train.
The Americans with Disabilites Act (ADA) is miles ahead of any legal framework that I’m aware of in Europe. The US is a broken country in many ways, but that doesn’t mean that literally anything and everything has to be worse than in glorious Europe.
*The former is true for the US too, but the ADA still required many of them to make reasonable accomodations.
Think about your favorite restaurant, bar, kebab place, corner shop etc.
All have wheelchair ramps. Even the townhall that was built in the 1700s has a wheelchair ramp, as does the church built in the 1400s.
I only know a handful of places that are in the centre of dense cities that don’t have them.
Then if I wanted to make comparisons to the US, yes lots of buildings are wheelchair acceptable, but they still expect you to drive between those buildings, even if you’re disabled, so sidewalks and crossing points are abysmal.
I thought the idea was that Republicans are actively working on destroying what has been working fine and is benefitting lots of people, not just on preventing more progress.
As if Democrats don’t do the exact same thing in lock step. Interesting where your focus lies however. It’s helpful though because it indicates your bias.
The ignorance you’re showing here is absolutely astounding. Banning things and removing certain people’s rights is a defining part of US republican politics. Every damn week, there’s a new thing they’ve decided is evil and needs to be banned. That’s very much not the case with US democrat politics. Sure, there are things they too want to ban or change, but it’s based on logic and not a constant stream of new things.
Yes, thankfully the Democrats aren’t the party of trying to ban stuff. Imagine if they were, and came out of nowhere to like ban gas stoves, gas cars, freedom of medical choices, and gender affirming surgery for kids. If any of that was true then I’d have a pretty good point, but thankfully it isn’t. Right?
Not specifically. They just picked a random idea out of a hat. One that is currently working fine with no issue. To signify that is the type of stuff they go after.
Let me break down the original post for you, since you’re refusing to understand it for some reason. Free ice cream is a ridiculous thing that would never happen, but would be amazing if it did, and countries like Finland seem to often be in the news for doing amazing things. Banning wheelchair ramps is a ridiculous thing that would never happen, but would be terrible if it did, and the USA seems to often be in the news for doing terrible things. You understand the meaning of a hyperbole - you’re just being obtuse.
Because free ice cream is good? I remember a local bank would give out free ice cream one day a year during a promotion, and it brought the whole town out. Musicians would come and play for everyone, and we’d all just sit and enjoy the day with some ice cream. Sounds like a much more amazing change for a government to make than taking away yet another established right from their population.
It’s saying that it’s really bad that America has fallen so far lately.
Abortion rights are gone, voting rights are being messed with, a racist misogynistic president has a significant chance of winning the next election, gay rights are in peril. America isn’t bad, but it’s actively getting worse, so when a news article comes about about it, it’s generally noting that downward trend. The news specifically talks about changes in things, not their current state. It also talks about big-ticket items, so smaller good things that happen don’t get on the news when there’s a bigger bad one going on. And there are a lot of big bad ones going on right now.
Americans aren’t America. I’m an American, and I staunchly oppose just about all major changes that have happened to my country in the last decade. I understand that I am not my country, and the actions of my country are not my own. I love my country in the same way that I love my drug addict cousin; he makes me very uncomfortable and embarrassed right now, but I really hope he comes around eventually, because I have great memories of who he used to be. I’m doing my best to help him change, but it’s not been enough.
The constructive criticism is that America should try to be less of a country where someone expects to hear bad news, and more of a country where someone expects to hear good news.
…would be welcome. As I said originally, of all the things you can criticize the US for, wheelchair accessibility isn’t one of them. And it’s not likely to become one of them any time soon.
My objection is that OP is not constructive. It could have been–plenty to criticize as I said–but it’s not. At best it’s ignorant; at worst it’s vindictive.
It’s not criticizing disability rights. They way hyperboles work is that they need to be over the top. If you want to use a hyperbole for terrible news about America, you need something terrible that specifically wouldn’t happen, even in America right now. That’s why they used disability rights - because they’re NOT in danger. If they had said something like “America revokes gay rights” it wouldn’t be a hyperbole, because that’s a real risk at the moment.
Again, Americans aren’t America. It’s criticizing the actions of the governmental body, not your average person who has no more control over that government than any of his 300,000,000+ constituents. And honestly, while there are many bigger issues on the table, I wouldn’t be terribly surprised if the president who has shown complete disdain for the disabled decided to go after their rights as well. But for now there’s bigger fish to fry.
Nope. The topic at hand is free ice-ceam. A topic that you, as a rational adult, can understand that is 100% literal and not at hyperbolic example to make a point about general trends and not a single specific item.
Tldr, they’re actually trying and have been trying, to pass bills to gut the ADA because disability access is anti American.
Also, the post is just making fun of the US consistently doing messed up stuff. When picking something for hyperbole, you usually pick something that’s extreme, not something that actually already happened.
it’s not quite as funny to say “the news is always like: former US president argues he should legally be able to do whatever he wants without consequences and courts might let him, meanwhile Finland has nearly eradicated homelessness.” You do get that the point was to be funny?
We Americans are not the monstrous caricatures you make us out to be. We’re not evil. We’re not wicked. And the US is not some dystopian nightmare. It’s actually a pretty good place to live.
First, I live in the US, so not sure where you’re going with that.
Second, nice straw man. No one said Americans were evil, people said the news is often distressing and backwards.
Third, it doesn’t matter when it’s from when your argument was “America would never assail disability rights!”. An article about recent efforts by active politicians to rollback our biggest protections speaks to that. In any case, here’s a more recent article on the topic: huffpost.com/…/midterm-elections-republicans-disa…
Four, you’re entirely lacking in nuance or a sense of humor, and seen incapable of distinguishing a joke from “all Americans are evil”, which is definitely a way to live, but not a very productive one if you ask me.
The proposal shouldn’t have existed in the first place! There wouldn’t be a need to kill the proposal if our representation was composed of empathetic decent people, instead of ghouls bought out by the wealthy few.
It’s pretty monstrous to even consider proposing a removal of legislation that objectively helps a lot of Americans.
Nope, you’re either just a moron with shit reading comprehension skills, or you’re a sealioning troll.
I never said anything about all Americans, I said a portion of our representatives have proposed gutting ADA protections, which is pretty universally liked in America.
That’s an example used in the OP meme, but the context still suggest all those other things, too. That’s what the “news is always like” part is. You can replace wheel chair access with all sorts of things and the meme would still ring true.
Check the thread as a whole, my guy. Your critique of the example isn’t where people started disagreeing with you, but the secondary argument you made when someone said the meme itself isn’t just about wheel chair accessibility.
Finland did not in fact make ice cream free, but you don’t challenge that. This is a meme, it could have said anything that sounds grotesquely arbitrary and callous, like banning left handed scissors, even if two-handed tools are probably more easily available in America than in many other parts of the world, perhaps even Finland.
It wasn’t criticising anything though. It was a hyperbole, an outlandishly absurd proposition that nobody in their right mind would take seriously. Well, almost nobody I suppose.
No. It would be weakened. The point is America is taking things we’re good at and rolling them back. It loses its point if you pick something we’ve always been bad at.
It’s painful to admit, but American politicians do not actually represent Americans. Over 80% of us believe abortion should be legal under some if not all circumstances. We are being held hostage by an ignorant minority.
You’re hastily summarizing some stupid political hit piece as the totality of what everyone in the country thinks. That’s incredibly lazy thinking. What country are you from where everyone thinks the same exact way and the news accurately reports it?
Of course we’re not but “the supreme court bans something good because it’s not explicitly allowed in a 200 year old document” is a goddamn accurate statement lol
Evil and malicious? Of course not. Mislead by a tailor-made Christian cult that always supports whatever the cult leader thinks is important? Literally nothing more American than that. We have a state that was founded for that propose. The largest, consistent voting block in America is fueled by exactly this.
It’s purposefully hyperbolic to illustrate a point. You think that Finland is seriously making all ice cream free?
I would not be the least bit surprised if all the Abbotts and Thomases and Trumps and Desantises (Desanti?) announced tomorrow that they would no longer be supporting the ADA’s immoral drain on commercial profits governmental budgets.
And before someone points it out, gutting a system that he has personally benefited from to fuck over Texans is exactly the kind of thing Abbott would do.
And before someone points it out, gutting a system that he has personally benefited from to fuck over Texans is exactly the kind of thing Abbott would do.
Not would, he has. After the tree crippled him, he sued for his wealth. Then he outlawed the same type of payouts for the exact type of lawsuits he benefited from. Definition of pulling the ladder up behind you.
Just read through some of the responses I’ve gotten. Some people think it’s a good illustration because it’s very plausible. Some because it’s not at all plausible.
I’m saying it’s not a good illustration because it’s not at all plausible.
I don’t think it makes much difference whether or not it is plausible. It’s just trying to communicate a message. I guess it has to be plausible enough that a reader can understand what it is even talking about; but not so plausible that the reader is led to believe this specific case is actually happening.
That’s just one more interpretation to add to the ones I mentioned.
Which is fundamentally my point. Had the OP used something that is actually happening then it would be harder to interpret the message in unintended ways. And it would be much more readily accepted by Americans like myself who do not see themselves as evil, stupid, malicious, or any of the other insults that necessarily follow from any interpretation the OP.
Technically in common disability parlance the motion of movement in a wheel chair is still considered “walking” just like listening to an audiobook is considered “reading” for visually impaired people.
Basically it accepts the whatever means you get to the end product as being a synonyms with the verbs those used by abled people.
In most of America you can’t walk to the store even if you don’t use a wheelchair. At my old place I could see a grocery store from my house, but it was on the other side of a limited access road, I had to go 1.5miles to a pedestrian overpass to be able to get to it making it a 6 mile walk to get 100 yards.
Per the bible, we aren't really even allowed to be human beings and are all born wretches full of original sin. If that's true than I'd rather have the free ice cream and body tattoos and promiscuity while I'm going to hell.
And then Goku stood with his 5 companions and they all went super Saiyan. 2. They channeled the energy from their pure hearts (even Vegeta, though everyone did doubt his heart was pure, they let it slide because they really wanted to see the coming fight and Brolly would have been just as questionable) and at first nothing happened and the god of destruction Beerus was about to destroy the world. 3. But then a new kind of energy filled Goku and powered him up even more than SSJ3, though it did not make his hair even bigger and brow even more like that of a pre-human hominid. 4. Instead, it turned his hair red and his ki godly and pleased even Beerus, who once destroyed an entire planet because they burned one side of his toast too much. 5. And then Goku the god looked at Beerus and said, “Let there be fight.” 6. And then they fought and it was good.
Well there never really was a "Jesus" who saved us from original sin, and the bible is simply a work of misogynistic and bigoted fiction. I don't need "saving," I'm not a 'wretch,' I was never "blind but now I see." WRONG. WRONG ON ALL COUNTS!!!! I am a human being of great value and worth by virtue of my existence, and I don't require or want dependency on some fictional idiotic being for my salvation or sense of worth.
OH yeah. I'm doing great, sometimes I get a little carried away with my statements - but I really am doing great. And I feel I owe that to my own hard work and resilience and not being dependent on a fictional diety (but that's my way of seeing it).
I sometimes forget that there are people out there that take any of this seriously. I was just explaining a plot point so your reply seemed very out of left field with a chainsaw bear.
Yeah it was a little heavy handed, I admit. I live in Utah where religion is most people's way of life, and believe me, they're dead serious about it to the point that it's almost frightening.
A bit dramatic for this conversation… but given the circumstances with some religious people I absolutely get where you’re coming from. We do not need to be given the right to exist by others - we create our value.
We do not need to be told morality - we create morality (for we do not need to be told “do not be cruel or you will burn in hell,” as we understand that cruelty is for the weak who wish to be powerful, and not needed by the truly powerful.)
We do not need a god to align our will to - we can direct our collective wills by our own strength. We are worthy or unworthy of love by our own means - we do not need “forgiveness” from anyone but ourselves.
Maybe so but I'm nothing if not overly dramatic most of the time. The reason I go all hystrionic and raving about it is, because sometimes I feel like the only way people hear you or even pay attention is if you go ballistic and overstate things.
We do create our own morality, and as we learned in philosophy classes, morality is an individual (not social) construct.
I totally agree with your conclusion that we do not need a "god" to align our will to, as humans we've accomplished unbelievable miraculous things on our own. Some may say that's because of divine design, but I say it's because we're just that intelligent. Not so intelligent as a god, maybe - but we should trust in ourselves and absolutely be good to ourselves (forgive ourselves as you say).
This is a profoundly racist sentiment. There is nothing special about Nordics. They're just people from a place. There's nothing about being born somewhere that makes you vibe with people from that place and agree on everything. Ask the Baltics or the Middle East.
It’s the American right wing way of convincing the population that 1: you’ll never have peace with a mixed population and 2: we can never have the nice things other countries have because we’re a mixed population.
They get to keep the status quo of “everything gets worse so businesses owners make more” and they get to use the racist dog whistles to keep those racist asshats on their side by “proving” race mixing makes things worse…
It works because people don’t really think about what’s being said. :(
This but a little bit unironically. They and their Scandinavian neighbors went unaligned during the Cold War and reaped an enormous peace dividend.
Now that the country is getting sucked into the Ukraine-Russia mess, they’re pivoting towards domestic spending cuts and tighter immigration rules and a big new military budget.
Strange that, when a country invaded another country, invades that same country again a handful of years later, and then that same invading country threatens to invade your country if you try to join a certain group of people, that you might go ahead and try to prevent that country from invading you.
Yeah, same wavelength, right, there was bloody civil war in Finland just bit over 100 years ago. Whites (the right) and reds (the left), with 10 000 executions on losing side.
America also has a lot people who have lived here for generations too, at least long enough generationally to not particularly matter much any more. That’s not something particularly unique to Finland.
America just more uniquely treats some people much worse than others. For example parts of my family came to the US as immigrants around the turn of the 1900s and it took a while for italians (who at the time were the “dirty brown people bringing drugs and crime to our streets”) to gain “white people” status around the 1970s. I have friends who’s families have family trees much longer rooted in America, but have historically been treated a lot worse than I or my parents ever have even into the present day.
If we really wanted to explore the concept further there’s also been a not insignificant about of cultural exchange that happened between the Scandinavian area and numerous regions outside their immediate area, as vikings traveled around, they encounter the early British, Normans and Franks, the had encounters with the late Christian and early Muslim world surrounding the Hagia Sophia, as evidenced by the viking graffiti carved I to stonework in there. They’ve had Christian missionaries proselytize their lands and convert them to Christianity away from the Norse traditions and dramatically retold those traditions from a christocentric framing.
Finland isn’t some culturally untouched place, left to their own devices for centuries. They both invaded others and were invaded, they engaged in trade and cultural exchange, they influenced other cultures and other cultures influenced them.
Glad to bring another perspective to the situation. I’m tired of the “Nordic countries are a culturally cohesive population” argument while ignoring the centuries cultural exchange and interaction with the world beyond their borders. it’s lazy right wing “rationalization” about how social safety nets and better public policy that helps people can’t work in the US because of “cultural disunity”
Is… is that actually what happened? My younger self might have assumed you were exaggerating, but my current self has seen too much to assume anything.
It always pisses my wife off when I park in a “handicapped” spot that is really just an old spot with badly faded paint.
For a handicapped parking spot to actually be a handicapped parking spot, you need both the pavement painting and the sign.
I would like to note that the spots I’m talking about aren’t even the ones close to the building (which is probably why they took down the sign), and there are actual spots closer to the door.
Hey there, sometimes-wheelchair-user here. Afaik the law is also the same where I live, the spot has to have a sign. Here, when there’s a spot with just faded paint, it usually just means that the handicap spot got moved somewhere else. The only thing I’d suggest is if you don’t already, just check and make sure that there is a spot somewhere else that does have a sign. If there isn’t, it’s probably because the owner just didn’t mark the spot properly. In that case, it’s best to leave it open for those who need it, even though it wouldn’t technically be against the law to park there.
I’m not accusing you of anything, just putting this out there in case the situation comes up. Cheers!
Add comment