This post is going to be somewhat against the grain and I wouldn't be surprised to see it locked but just know my goal here isn't to create problems or conflict but to put the same objective and analytical/critical lens that Chris and people around him are subject to onto another important group of players in Chris's story. Namely Chris-watchers like myself.
While I am fully of the view that Chris is a jerk with few redeeming qualities- I feel the wider community around him is a lightening rod for shitty and depressing attitudes toward the disabled I want to challenge that and open a discussion,
1) Call me an SJW if you will but I often feel offended by the way slurs towards the mentality disabled are causally thrown around in Chris discussion (the r-word, "tard" etc) If there was a jerky lolcow of Chris proportions who was black or gay would that make casual derogatory usage of racial or homophobic terms ok? (and "gay", the other f-words etc are used in the same non-literal derogatory way for example) I feel like some in the wider Chris community use him as an excuse to express prejudice and bigotry in a socially acceptable context.
2) It seems like nearly every discussion about Chris features someone going "WELL I have an autistic/intellectually disabled cousin/brother/sister/acquittance who has a job and runs marathons in his spare time!" in the delusion this is displaying a disability positive attitude. With society and the economy as it is now plenty of people with non of Chris's setbacks and many many with them are in his positive despite their best efforts. Using the highly laudable achievements of disabled people to beat down other impaired people is on a level with "oh you're so articulate... not like those other blacks!" .. bigoted bs in other words.
3) Maybe it's because I'm a European socialist (here the latter label is neither stigmatised nor a badge of "ohh-look-how-edgy-I-am!") who just doesn't relate to widely held public views on "welfare" .. but it never ceases to baffle and disturb me how Chris honestly claiming a government benefit to which he is legally entitled and likely could not survive without is a source of shame/seen as a moral flaw. In an ideal world they'd be plentiful jobs suited to the talents and impairments of people like Chris that pay a living wage, but we don't live in an ideal world we live in a world where the disabled statistically are overwhelmingly economically excluded. I feel Chris IS entitled to his tugboat and not trying harder to enhance his income finding a permitted job and how he spends his money might be harmful for him but they're no one else's business. Tax payers huh? I mean it's not like anyone else has to put up with their taxes going to stuff they disapprove of is it? I don't feel he spends taxpayers money on vidya, I feel his spends the meagre share of the collective wealth the government feels is appropriate to grant those economically excluded via no fault of their own... which even with the maximum effort in play is the situation Chris will likely always fall into.
While I am fully of the view that Chris is a jerk with few redeeming qualities- I feel the wider community around him is a lightening rod for shitty and depressing attitudes toward the disabled I want to challenge that and open a discussion,
1) Call me an SJW if you will but I often feel offended by the way slurs towards the mentality disabled are causally thrown around in Chris discussion (the r-word, "tard" etc) If there was a jerky lolcow of Chris proportions who was black or gay would that make casual derogatory usage of racial or homophobic terms ok? (and "gay", the other f-words etc are used in the same non-literal derogatory way for example) I feel like some in the wider Chris community use him as an excuse to express prejudice and bigotry in a socially acceptable context.
2) It seems like nearly every discussion about Chris features someone going "WELL I have an autistic/intellectually disabled cousin/brother/sister/acquittance who has a job and runs marathons in his spare time!" in the delusion this is displaying a disability positive attitude. With society and the economy as it is now plenty of people with non of Chris's setbacks and many many with them are in his positive despite their best efforts. Using the highly laudable achievements of disabled people to beat down other impaired people is on a level with "oh you're so articulate... not like those other blacks!" .. bigoted bs in other words.
3) Maybe it's because I'm a European socialist (here the latter label is neither stigmatised nor a badge of "ohh-look-how-edgy-I-am!") who just doesn't relate to widely held public views on "welfare" .. but it never ceases to baffle and disturb me how Chris honestly claiming a government benefit to which he is legally entitled and likely could not survive without is a source of shame/seen as a moral flaw. In an ideal world they'd be plentiful jobs suited to the talents and impairments of people like Chris that pay a living wage, but we don't live in an ideal world we live in a world where the disabled statistically are overwhelmingly economically excluded. I feel Chris IS entitled to his tugboat and not trying harder to enhance his income finding a permitted job and how he spends his money might be harmful for him but they're no one else's business. Tax payers huh? I mean it's not like anyone else has to put up with their taxes going to stuff they disapprove of is it? I don't feel he spends taxpayers money on vidya, I feel his spends the meagre share of the collective wealth the government feels is appropriate to grant those economically excluded via no fault of their own... which even with the maximum effort in play is the situation Chris will likely always fall into.
