I shouldn't be surprised anymore that people on the internet would down vote a comment like this, but I am.
Seriously, what's the logic there? Someone has a problem with me taking issue with someone using "mental damaged people" as a way of describing people who make poor decisions? Try replacing "mental damaged people" with "gay people" or "brown people" or "millennials" or "old people" and see how you feel. Maybe it'll help make sense as to why "mental damaged people" is equally unacceptable.
Imagine if I'd suggested that the parent commenter was "mental damaged"? I think most people would agree that would be out of line, and it absolutely would be, yet do we feel the same way when the parent commenter calls other people the same thing? Is it more acceptable because they're some ambiguous and faceless group of people with terrible headlight etiquette?
People don't need to have a mental illness to make poor decisions. People do just fine without help.
Suggesting that people with disruptive high beams are "mental damaged people" is harmful because it reinforces views that people with mental illnesses are "less than", or are stupid or not trustworthy, or scary. They're not. They're people we know and love, and they're often struggling to even admit that they need help. It's hard enough without also feeling like society will look down on you for something you didn't ask for and have little control over.
It's also just incorrect. People who are not "mental damaged people" have headlights that are too bright and adjusted poorly.
Note the first HN guideline for commenting says "Be kind,", and I think calling out harmful behavior counts. My motivation isn't to fire of zingers and get points and show how virtuous I am. It's because I love, live with, am related to, work with, and care for people in my life who struggle with mental illness. Odds are the parent commenter does too. Odds are that other readers do too. Calling out bad behavior that harms marginalized people and people with similar challenges might not be fun to be called out on, especially if it wasn't the intention, but might change how you communicate on the internet.
That said, by calling out downvotes, I'm equally as guilty of not honoring the HN guidelines as the parent commenter. If readers choose to focus on that single violation, that's a choice they're free to make, though I'd encourage you to consider my arguments before making that choice.
Seriously, what's the logic there? Someone has a problem with me taking issue with someone using "mental damaged people" as a way of describing people who make poor decisions? Try replacing "mental damaged people" with "gay people" or "brown people" or "millennials" or "old people" and see how you feel. Maybe it'll help make sense as to why "mental damaged people" is equally unacceptable.
Imagine if I'd suggested that the parent commenter was "mental damaged"? I think most people would agree that would be out of line, and it absolutely would be, yet do we feel the same way when the parent commenter calls other people the same thing? Is it more acceptable because they're some ambiguous and faceless group of people with terrible headlight etiquette?
People don't need to have a mental illness to make poor decisions. People do just fine without help.
Suggesting that people with disruptive high beams are "mental damaged people" is harmful because it reinforces views that people with mental illnesses are "less than", or are stupid or not trustworthy, or scary. They're not. They're people we know and love, and they're often struggling to even admit that they need help. It's hard enough without also feeling like society will look down on you for something you didn't ask for and have little control over.
It's also just incorrect. People who are not "mental damaged people" have headlights that are too bright and adjusted poorly.
Note the first HN guideline for commenting says "Be kind,", and I think calling out harmful behavior counts. My motivation isn't to fire of zingers and get points and show how virtuous I am. It's because I love, live with, am related to, work with, and care for people in my life who struggle with mental illness. Odds are the parent commenter does too. Odds are that other readers do too. Calling out bad behavior that harms marginalized people and people with similar challenges might not be fun to be called out on, especially if it wasn't the intention, but might change how you communicate on the internet.
That said, by calling out downvotes, I'm equally as guilty of not honoring the HN guidelines as the parent commenter. If readers choose to focus on that single violation, that's a choice they're free to make, though I'd encourage you to consider my arguments before making that choice.