Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainYooh
That's not the point he made though at all.
The increased media attention to transgender-related issues is more likely to result in new legislation, regulations and follow-up actions much faster than the issues of the disabled, strictly because of this attention level and not because of the number of people these actions would affect. That's the real concern. Saying, both issues are equally important is not helping. Yes, they are equally important to the people affected. But no, they are not equally important to the country, in general. The legislative action and follow-up should be directed to address the needs of the larger group first. Defining government priorities based on media attention to a juicy story of male nudity in a women-only spa would be wrong.
|
I know that, but as Jammie's notes on the last page, the disabled access analogy isn't really apt and it certainly isn't an either/or situation as to what group to help. The one similarity that I do see, is the thought that this is such a small group, that maybe it isn't worth the effort. Sadly, that was the attitude of many towards the disabled, not so long ago. Why retrofit stairs with ramps at say, a nightclub? "What are they going to do, dance?" I know was thought by me and many others back in the day. It was ignorant and dehumanizing. Accommodating for the disabled is a worthwhile endeavour, and I think the same can be said for the transgendered. I think we've come along way in this and the further ahead we will be with these discussions.