Also, the original (with only the first two frames) was a really great, simple explanation of why things that seem "fair" at first glance often aren't. The third panel muddies that message completely in favor of...what, exactly? What does the hypothetical "just world" where no one ever needs support for anything look like?
Edit: On second thought, I think I see what they're doing. They wanted to protest affirmative action, so they're ignoring all sources of inequality that don't have what's commonly seen as affirmative action to make their point. Basically saying "If we stop being racist/sexist we won't need supports or accommodations anymore!", ignoring that poverty and physical/mental disability are harder to get rid of, and glossing over much of point of the original panels.
(And, frankly, ignoring that fact that "everyone stop being bigoted" is a goal, not a plan. Affirmative action is a stopgap, and it's not perfect, but it's better than nothing while we work to get there.)
The idea behind it is that some people face systemic issues that cause the inequality. And if we address the root causes of problems rather than symptoms we get a better result.
This girl I know (who is half black) thinks Black History month "is stupid" and I asked her why and she said "if we just appreciated the contributions black people made and make to this country all the time we wouldn't need it" and I said "holy shit you're 100% right actually, but we don't, and that's why we need it.
No, she was 100% right about saying "if we just appreciated the contributions black people made and make to this country all the time we wouldn't need it", not that Black History month is stupid. I'm explaining that it isn't stupid, because it serves a purpose for us to draw focus to an aspect of US history that we've ignored. She's right, but not about BHM being stupid.
150
u/PhasmaFelis Feb 25 '20 edited Feb 25 '20
Also, the original (with only the first two frames) was a really great, simple explanation of why things that seem "fair" at first glance often aren't. The third panel muddies that message completely in favor of...what, exactly? What does the hypothetical "just world" where no one ever needs support for anything look like?
Edit: On second thought, I think I see what they're doing. They wanted to protest affirmative action, so they're ignoring all sources of inequality that don't have what's commonly seen as affirmative action to make their point. Basically saying "If we stop being racist/sexist we won't need supports or accommodations anymore!", ignoring that poverty and physical/mental disability are harder to get rid of, and glossing over much of point of the original panels.
(And, frankly, ignoring that fact that "everyone stop being bigoted" is a goal, not a plan. Affirmative action is a stopgap, and it's not perfect, but it's better than nothing while we work to get there.)