|
|
|
|
|
by JumpCrisscross
460 days ago
|
|
> there are other immutable characteristics that do not trigger that unsettledness Like what? > this gives us reason to question why this particular characteristic became so charged Because it's been a tool of social division. As a result, we've been attuned to it culturally from both sides (separation and integration). |
|
The Disability Alliance Network (DA)?
I'm assuming that's a good example, because I've yet to see an outcry around disabled people getting unfair advantages.
But, it's really down to any group that has not been socially or politically charged. So, I'd also say things like women's groups, given their historic underrepresentation in tech. However, that's also become charged recently.
So, what we have is this thing of defining what's OK by how people react to it or, maybe more accurately, how people are encouraged to react. That seems potentially unhealthy and infinitely abusable.
>Because it's been a tool of social division.
Exactly. But, it's not just division in the sense of splitting people in half. There's also a historic inequity that corresponds with one side.
Some make the argument that you can't heal division by "dividing further". But, I think it's a little unfair to simply not acknowledge those who have been negatively impacted. The other part is that the existence of a group doesn't have to be divisive in itself. In fact, seeking to understand and support them can be quite the opposite.