turningrite Posted December 10, 2018 Report Share Posted December 10, 2018 21 hours ago, dialamah said: If a group is 'at special risk' they should get the 'same protection' as those not at special risk. Got it. 1,) So, let's apply this logic elsewhere: Children under a certain size are at special risk of being injured in a car accident. But the government should not mention, notice or address that in any way, because to say a child under a certain size needs special protection is to say that a child over a certain size deserves less protection. 2.) Poorer neighborhoods tend to have more domestic violence/crime than wealthier neighborhoods. But police should not pay 'special attention' to poorer neighborhoods, because to do so is to say that wealthier neighborhoods deserve less attention. 3.) Women and children are at greater risk of sexual assault than men. No additional resources should be provided to women or children to prevent or address sexual assault, because that means that 'men deserve less'. I'm skeptical about the need for special treatment where intellectually competent adults are concerned. 1.) The needs of children shouldn't be addressed in the same context as those of adults. The differences are obvious. To conflate the two amounts to infantilizing adults based on race, gender, religion or other specific characteristics. Is this your intent? 2.) Poorer neighborhoods very likely do generate more crime and my suspicion is that they get more police attention than do wealthy neighborhoods, although my guess (just a guess) is that emergency calls might be responded to more quickly in wealthier neighborhoods than poorer ones. On the other hand, some populations in poorer communities complain that they get what they believe to be too much police attention. This is a issue on which the police sometimes simply can't win. 3.) Again, please leave the children aside as any comparison with adults is clearly problematic. As for greater risk of sexual assault faced by adult women, this is likely a function of evolutionary biology that has applied throughout history. Women, of course, are provided resources because the extent of domestic violence and sexual assault is increasingly acknowledged and understood - at least in Western societies - while there doesn't seem to be a lot of demand or pressure to allocate additional resources to address domestic violence faced by men, although I believe such violence does exist. I suspect, then, that the differential allocation is largely justifiable on the basis of demonstrable demand rather than any kind of discriminatory intent. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.