• 0 Posts
  • 23 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 7th, 2023

help-circle

  • If anything it’s the car-dependent infrastructure that is ableist, as many people with disabilities cannot drive. I can’t, and if I didn’t live in a place where alternative modes of transport were a thing, I would either be stuck at home, or have to waste money on buying a specially made car.

    Far from all disabled people use wheelchairs or have mobility issues. Some have problems with their sight, concentration, fine motor skills etc. which prevent them from driving safely. Even if you cannot walk or ride a bike, and have trouble getting on/off public transport by yourself, living in an environment that is walkable and bikeable usually means that it is also easier/safer to get around in a wheelchair or on a moped.



  • Americans seem very “fighty” compared to people from many other countries. You just have to say something that could be construed as liberal (the American kind) or conservative, too politically correct or incorrect, or mention you ride a bicycle or have an outdoor cat, to set some people off. With some Americans having a conversation is like navigating a minefield, especially those who have very little understanding of the rest of the world and reads everything you say into an American context, language barriers and all.

    I love talking politics, and have had pleasant conversations with all kinds of people but I have learned from experience to just not bother with Americans, unless they’re the very curious and open kind.






  • People here are not for completely banning all cars, but for reducing the use of private cars. I personally don’t think personal cars have a place in society (outside a couple of edge cases) and that we should start phasing them out. Other people just want better alternatives. I don’t think I’ve ever seen anyone argue that disabled people, who need a car to get around should not be allowed to have one, or that we should ban taxis and moving companies from using cars.

    I think that would be a very difficult trip to make without a car, but you could easily make that trip without a private car, especially in a society where that is the norm. You could either rent a car for a day or two, or use some kind of moving/transport/taxi service to get around.

    Another perspective is that society would look different if is wasn’t the norm to use cars to get around, and maybe you wouldn’t need to travel as far to get to your local shows. I know nothing about showing dogs but I’ve grown up with ponies in my backyard, and from my childhood home (in the middle of nowhere by Danish standards) I could walk to a couple of horse camps and shows per year. Within an hours drive there was plenty to do, every weekend. We just kept our ponies as pets/lawn movers and took them camping or to a 4H show once in a while, and we rarely needed a trailer or even a car for that. When we did need a trailer, we would rent one at the local gas station or hitch a ride with someone.


  • vldnl@feddit.dktoAutism@lemmy.world*Permanently Deleted*
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    1 year ago

    I think school/work days would be shorter and more intense. Small talk and chit chat would not be an integrated part of a work/school day, but instead something that happened before or after school/work if you wanted to. A meeting wouldn’t start with 10 minutes of “how have you been?” or random jokes, but instead jump right into business. Working from home would also be more common.

    Having a niche hobby or working with something niche would be way more common, and hobbies would be viewed as more important than they are today. People without any hobbies or interests would be viewed as really weird.

    Practical and comfortable clothes would also be more common, and fashion would be more erratic/varied. Pop culture would be less of a thing.




  • I think you could argue that this is an example of cognitive dissonance. It is uncomfortable to come face to face with new information that contradicts your beliefs or actions, and it requires energy if you want to integrate that new information into your worldview and adjust your actions. It is much easier to deny that information, even when it is clearly true.

    For example, when it came out that aspartame might cause cancer, if you (like me) have eaten/drunk a lot of products containing it or have had a strong belief that it was completely safe, then it may be more comfortable for you to criticize WHO or think “well, it’s not really relevant for me because my family isn’t predisposed for cancer.” If you didn’t care about aspartame or artificial sweeteners before, you will probably readily accept that there may or may not be a cancer link.



  • Having your groceries delivered or buying a moped or motorcycle might be an option for you. I don’t think anyone on here would begrudge you using a car in that situation, though.

    I think the anti-rural sentiment you sometimes see, mostly stems from how unsustainable and car dependent the lifestyles a lot of people who live outside cities are. People who find a job in a city to get a high pay, move out of said city to get a garden and then commute back and forth between their home office and their work office, with very little concern for how they effect the world around them. They take no personal responsibility and don’t want to take collective responsibility either, because that could threaten their lifestyle.

    People who live in suburbs, villages or rurally because that is where it makes sense for them to live, isn’t an issue. It makes sense to move to the countryside when you retire and no longer have to be anywhere. It also makes sense to live in the countryside if that is where you work or if you work from home. Some of these people would benefit greatly from owning a car, while others can get by just fine with a bicycle or their own legs.

    You can also do a lot to lessen the dependence on cars outside city centers. You can easily run metros and trams into the suburbs and encourage a higher density (more row houses and smaller apartment complexes). Rurally you can encourage people to build villages (clusters of houses) instead of every house being spaced evenly apart, and you can run bus lines through those villages.


  • I think some people’s self-worth relies on them being “good”/right/perfect, so they can’t apologize without also hurting themselves. I don’t really get it either, because in my experience being able to apologize when you need to, is a huge strength. People will overlook almost any mistake you’ve made when they know that you feel bad about it, instead of having it turn into an useless conflict.

    Even if you don’t feel like apologizing surely you can say “I didn’t mean to hurt you and I’ll try not to do it again” or even “I didn’t mean to hurt you but I don’t really care about your feelings/I think you’re being unreasonable” so you know where they stand.


  • I get that, but those were the kind of nuances and perspectives that I was talking about. You can think that drunk driving is a bad thing that should be prevented, without resorting to black/white thinking like: drunk drivers are bad and they should be thrown in jail.

    Maybe they should be, but what is the downsides of that policy? What is the reduction in drunk driving and drunk driving accidents expected to be? Who are the drunk drivers and when do they drive drunk? What do they do in other places/countries? Anything about our country/area in particular that causes people to drive drunk? Is there anything else we could do that is more effective and/or less expensive? Could an alternative solution be to run busses through the night? Involve parents? Require alcolocks to be installed in cars?

    It’s not about whether you are a good or a bad person, or about what your beliefs or values are. In my experience, poorly educated people are just more likely to think in absolutes, which makes sense, because analytical thinking and the ability to view things through different “lenses” and from different perspectives, is something they try to teach you in school.


  • Understanding that things are nuanced is not the same thing as not having opinions.

    You can acknowledge that drinking alcohol can cause addiction, act as a social lubricant, and decide if you want to drink. You can even have an opinion on what you think alcohol’s role in society should be and what should be done to prevent drunk driving.


  • If only artists could hold copyrights to their works, this wouldn’t be an issue.

    Corporations are usually not the ones who create art, they just hire people who do. If Disney spends an astronomical amount on money on hiring artists and producing a work, there should be a separate set of laws that protects them from someone sweeping in and stealing the franchise or the product. It shouldn’t be down to copyright-laws, because Disney isn’t an artist.

    Copyright also grants the right to opt out of the commercialization of your work. Even if you really like a painting I have done, you should not have the right to demand that I or someone else sell prints of it. If I instead want to just keep it on my Instagram profile, in my attic or hanging on the walls of a gallery, I should be free to do so.

    If you make something public people have the right to look at it and to get inspired by it, but I don’t think it’s unfair to ask that the artist retains the commercial rights to it.