There are 4 choices, 4 votes for Ievianty's debate

Is the minority being used for gain?

I'm not very big on politics, but at times I can't help but wonder if the minority of society, including "disabled" people, tend to be used quite a bit for gain by others, including money. Off the top of my head, I can think of injured people or those with some kind of sickness that makes it harder to work and function in society. Should they want to take care of such a problem, they usually have to gain a ton of money, usually just to even be seen by a doctor. Already being at a disadvantage, they have to work harder then the Average Joe just to even live the same standard of life that a person normally would. Somehow they seem to be expected to go above and beyond the usual work, when they already have a set back that the majority doesn't have. Should they have two or more set backs, things can be far worse especially if those set backs have ways of making sure they work together to stop them from being overcome so easily.

As for a more personal example, getting a sex change would require a lot of money. Normally a person in that situation would have low self-esteem which would make it a lot harder to work somewhere and keep it up. Then take into factor that many jobs would likely fire said person should they find out about their status, which might be unavoidable if they start going through big physical changes. Furthermore, they'll have the problem of possibly being subjected to abuse a lot more then a gay person, even within the gay community. So basically, they go through far more work and effort just to have the same standard of living as the Average Joe.

In my case, also take into factor things like Aspergers and people acting like all my problems are related to that, which their not. This is however not about my life story, especially since I gone into very little details. Anyway, how much truth, if any, is there to the minority having their set backs taken advantage of to get lots of money?
  • nature rules

    well everyone says we are animals and it's part of the animal kingdom's way for the strong to rule over the weak.
    Voted for by Energizer Bunny.
    View 3 comments
  • :

  • hmmm...
    In the example of transsexuals, there is a reason for the surgery to be expensive. Like many surgeries, it is difficult to perform. And unlike a necessary surgery, like an appendectomy, a sex change is not a vital surgery, so it is often considered cosmetic, so it will not be covered by insurance like others.

    I do not think anyone is purposely trying to take advantage of minorities. It may seem that way because of circumstance; however, there are those who take advantage of laws made to help disabled individuals.
    Voted for by Gyne and Tonic.
    Add a comment
  • :

  • I'm not exactly sure if, what you are asking, is defined within your explaination
    people who go for a sex change are not always of low self-esteem. if you think about it, you need a heck of a lot of self-esteem to go into the world (example:Male) wearing make-up and a mini-skirt.

    with any mental or pysical handicap (is the PC now adays??), people tend to see that handicap first, and then link all other problems to it.
    one can say they are not seeing the situation as the situation is, but seeing the situation as THEY are (translated to layman's, it means their pre-disposition affects the way they see a situation).

    weird isnt it, how self-centered we are?
    Voted for by Kazrith.
    Add a comment
  • :

  • hmm..
    like Kazrith mentioned, I don't know if what you are asking is defined so well. What do you mean "used for gain"?

    It's true that the price of living for handicap people is more than the "average joe", but I don't think this is because people want to make money from their disadvantages. My mother works with disabled teens and she does not make a lot of money in that feild. Looking after people with dissabilities does cost more than a "regular" person but I think that is to be expected because severely disabled people need special equipment and medicines. But it would be the same for me if I were to break a leg, I don't think it is discrimination.
    Voted for by Second.
    Add a comment
  • :

    •  

    None of the choices fit your opinion?  Add one →