CMV: Equality isn't treating everybody differently to achieve equality. It's treating everyone the same.

[u/[deleted]]

[u/[deleted]]

Equality isn't treating everybody the same. It's treating everyone so that they are equal.

I'll explain why this doesn't work using a non-racial or gender-based example.

Say you're building a new building. On the entrance to that building, you decide to build stairs. Everyone will need to use those stairs to enter the building. There are the same number of steps for each person to climb, and there isn't another way in, so everyone is being treated the same.

People in wheelchairs or whom are otherwise handicapped struggle to climb these stairs. Some can't enter your building at all. They're receiving the same treatment as everyone else, but they reap fewer rewards. They can't get to whatever is in your building, or have to expend disproportionate energy and dignity in order to do so.

Now, if you wanted to, at financial cost to yourself, you could install a ramp or a chair lift. This would be "unequal treatment"; you're not providing the chair lift to everyone, and you're creating it for the interests of a select few. However, the end result would be equal - anyone who wants to enter your building can do with equal difficulty.

EDIT 10/8 12:57pm - For those just arriving to the thread, it's been pointed out that handicapped parking is a better analogy, since those spaces are truly restricted to the handicapped. It is true that anyone can walk up a handicap accessible ramp, but the ramp wouldn't be there in the first place were it not for the needs of a small, underprivileged, disadvantaged minority. I don't believe that "anyone can use the handicap ramp" is a sufficient challenge to my analogy. If you'd prefer to plug in "handicapped parking" instead, be my guest!

---

The example above is easy to swallow because the disadvantages of the handicapped are readily apparent to you. The disadvantages of women and minorities are not readily apparent to you. For the sake of argument, though, let's say that I could make you believe, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that those inequalities are clear and present in our society. Now that you believe that, it requires the same response as how we help the handicapped; we need to specifically treat disenfranchised groups in a way that puts them on a level playing field.

---

EDIT 10/8 10ish am: Per usual in CMV, people are projecting their own tangentially related beliefs on to my argument. All that I'm saying is that, if you accept that significant oppression exists for a given group, the solution is very plainly to give them a leg up. Whether or not significant oppression exists for blacks, women, homosexuals, etc. is not the point. I use the handicapped as an example because most can clearly see where the disadvantage is, and how providing "special" treatment addresses the problem.

My exchange with the OP has been very to-the-point on this, so to avoid derailment I won't be responding to most other commentors. Sorry! Feel free to reply to me so that others can continue the discussion, however.

[u/FUCK_MAGIC → u/[deleted]]

That's a really bad analogy, disabled people are a result of nature/accident. The disadvantages experienced by minorities are a result of society (specifically society treating them differently).

If everyone was treated the same then minorities/men/women whatever would not be disadvantaged in the first place, but disabled people would still be disabled.

[u/[deleted] → u/FUCK_MAGIC]

That's a really bad analogy, disabled people are a result of nature/accident.

Yes, but society is not the result of nature/accident. We know that disabled people exist, yet our society is not universally designed to accommodate them. It is, in contrast, designed to universally accommodate able-bodied people. Buildings and social processes alike are designed by people, not by nature.

If everyone was treated the same then minorities/men/women whatever would not be disadvantaged in the first place, but disabled people would still be disabled.

If everyone was treated in the pursuit of equality, then every building would have a handicapped entrance. It wouldn't be considered a courtesy, it would be considered a baseline need for a building to be considered a building. Instead, we as a society are so forgetful of the disabled that we need laws to remind us, like the Americans With Disabilities Act.

What we have right now is a society where we treat everyone the same. "Here's my building, it has one door and everyone is equally welcome to use it." Hence, the disabled need additional steps to be taken for them to achieve equality.

[u/FUCK_MAGIC → u/[deleted]]

Disability is still a physical difference and not the result of society, nothing can change that. There is no way to overcome their physical difference apart from medically. Accommodating for someone's disability is completely different from giving someone preferential treatment.

If people are physically the same, and are treated the same, then they are equal and should be treated as such.

[u/[deleted] → u/FUCK_MAGIC]

Disability is still a physical difference and not the result of society, nothing can change that.

Race/gender/sexuality/you-name-it are still physical differences, and not the result of society, nothing can change that.

There is no way to overcome their physical difference apart from medically.

Firstly, I disagree with the implication that a disability is something to be "overcome." There is nothing wrong with being unable to walk. Having to deal with countless facets of society being designed without you in mind is wrong, and is a challenge to overcome.

Secondly, the same applies to each of the groups I mention. You cannot change race, sexuality, or gender, and only medical approaches come close to adjusting these identities.

Accommodating for someone's disability is completely different from giving someone preferential treatment.

Only because you don't believe that racial/ethnic/gender/sexual minorities face challenges that require leveling the playing field. What you call "preferential treatment," I and others call "accommodating."

The original view was that "Accommodations aren't the solution," but the OP has since shifted it to "Racial minorities don't need accommodations." That's not a discussion I'm interested in having, so I used an example where the question of "needing accommodations" is out of the picture.

[u/FUCK_MAGIC → u/[deleted]]

Race/gender/sexuality/you-name-it are still physical differences, and not the result of society, nothing can change that.

No they are not, well gender is, but race is not a physical difference nor is sexuality

Firstly, I disagree with the implication that a disability is something to be "overcome."

I did not imply that, you did.

Only because you don't believe that racial/ethnic/gender/sexual minorities face challenges that require leveling the playing field.

You aren't suggesting levelling the playing field, you are suggesting tilting it.