[unprepare]

Ahh yes, the always tired retort of "people in the past/in a different place have it worse, so you have no right to complain"

totally legitimate argument, im sure your grandfather fought hard for there to never be better working conditions for his grandchildren, and would hate that working conditions have gotten better and continue to improve.

have you ever complained that something tastes bad? dont forget theres starving children in africa, so you aren't allowed to complain about your food tasting bad, because someone has it worse, right?

Have you ever been thirsty and asked someone for water? that gall on you! people die everyday from dehydration, you being thirsty is just hipster self pity, you aren't going to die, so you aren't thirsty

see also:

>Fallacy of relative privation ("not as bad as") – dismissing an argument or complaint due to the existence of more important problems in the world, regardless of whether those problems bear relevance to the initial argument.

[majewsky]

Not every opposing argument is a fallacy. I observe the grandparents [1] as trying to put things in perspective, which is a very reasonable followup on a decidedly opinionated original article.

[1] Grandparents as in comment hierarchy, not as in coal miners.

[unprepare]

i never said every opposing argument is a fallacy, but this one definitely is.

what our grandparents experienced is irrelevant to discussions on how working conditions should continue to improve.

Would you have told the men starting the UAW that they should stop because their grandparents had to work longer hours and that they have no right to complain? Thats idiotic, its fallacious, and its not even an opposing argument, its an attempt to stop a conversation.