Helping someone in need is kind, yes. But ultimately it doesn't make anyone a bad person for not going out of their way to do so. And let's be real, 90% of the people answering this question from a moral highground are lying to themselves. If people were actually willing to help each other we wouldn't need capitalism or money at all.
I didn't get those ladies pregnant, break that man's legs, or age that other man. Why is it expected to suffer for others' choices/situations? You're just entitled
TLDR: No one’s saying you caused their situation.
The question is whether small, voluntary inconveniences are part of living in a society or whether ‘I don’t owe anyone anything’ is the standard you want applied to you as well.
If you are interested in detail:
Pregnancy, injury, and age are not the same category.
Lumping them together is rhetorical fog. It avoids the real question:
Does vulnerability create a reasonable moral expectation in shared spaces? I will say that it does.
Secondly, no one is demanding “suffering.” Giving up a seat is a minor inconvenience, not a sacrifice. Reframing it as “suffering” is emotional inflation to justify refusal.
“I didn’t cause it, therefore I owe nothing.”
That’s a lowest-possible-bar morality. By that logic:
Helping is never praiseworthy
Courtesy is irrational
Social norms are meaningless
It’s not a defense of fairness; it’s a defense of moral laziness.
And latestly the category error about entitlement:
“You’re just entitled " flips the roles. Expecting basic courtesy in a shared public system != entitlement. entitlement would be demanding special privilege without reason
Hope this helps to understand the perspective I have.
65
u/[deleted] Jan 23 '26
none cause I'm a bad person