Presumably, when you are speaking about these things you have first hand knowledge of reputable people and organisations.

And also, the burden of the constant demand to teach people about your lived experience, even though thousands of others who share it have already wilfully taken the time to document it extensively. We’re not talking about individual experiences, but about well establish and deep rooted systemic oppression.

At the end of the day, expecting marginalised people, especially random ones you “happen upon” (would they even be asking if I wasn’t here?), to be the ones constantly doing the work is an unearned entitlement that comes with privilege, and what those with that privilege should be doing instead is using it to lessen the burden on marginalised people, not increase it. Step one is learning to invest their own time and energy instead of demanding or even just expecting it from others.

With regard to the astroturfing, are you saying that the sources people might find are AI? Sure, that’s definitely a thing that is happening, but I’m not sure what I’m meant to do about that? I’m no better than the next person at recognising AI and would need to read through and make a call just like anyone else (and then we open a whole other can of worms of rating the writing and or expression levels, and potential use of assistive tools of, especially in this case, fellow disabled people, which can become really problematic, really fast).

Like I say, I’m perfectly happy to help, especially those who have shown even a bit of initiative, but there’s only so much I can do, and really, the burden shouldn’t be falling on us to not only educate those with more privilege, but also become expert at deciphering AI use (and within that, legitimate vs intentionally manipulative).

Na, it’s perfectly reasonable to expect people who claim to care and genuinely want to know, to make a minimal effort.

“I tried looking it up but couldn’t find an answer, do you mind helping me out”? Sure, no issue here, wouldn’t have even mentioned it. But to drop in to a conversation without knowing anything about the topic, and expect disabled (or otherwise marginalised) people who are personally impacted (and therefore constantly having to have the same emotionally laborious conversations over and over and over) to do the work for you before you’ve even tried? That’s going to get (seriously fucking gently) called out every time.

I have the same poor quality search engines at my disposal, and have to sift through similar results.

There is also an easy way to recognise actual advocacy sources vs industry publications - is a disabled person writing from their personal experience? Advocacy. Is the article written by someone who isn’t personally impacted? Irrelevant. Simple.

E: The fact that I went ahead and did the work for them anyway despite all of that (with, again, the gentlest of reminders that they could be doing it themselves), and people still find a way to complain about how supposedly unaccommodating I’m being is fucking wild…

It’s almost as if there is no ethical consumption under capitalism… 🤔

And I’m not trying to be an ass, but in the same way I’ve just had to look up “paper straws unsuitable for disabled people” to provide you with the answer, you could have just done so yourself and come across one of tens of thousand of articles, videos, podcasts, and images addressing this specific topic.

https://www.eater.com/2018/7/19/17586742/plastic-straw-ban-disabilities

https://creakyjoints.org/advocacy/plastic-straw-bans-bad-for-people-with-disabilities/

https://www.a-zine.net/blog/2018/7/31/straws-are-not-the-issue

http://web.archive.org/web/20240703214002/https://nypost.com/2018/07/02/banning-plastic-straws-is-more-scam-than-science/

https://inbedwithfridakahlo.wordpress.com/2018/07/12/banning-plastic-straws-the-strawman-of-strawmen/

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/jul/09/disabled-person-plastic-straws-baby-wipes

TL;DR:

(ID: 2 tables breaking down why each type of alternative straw might be unsuitable for different disabled people. If someone needs a more in depth description, please ask)

E: just for context

(ID: image of an old informational leaflet detailing the medical and accessibility benefits of single use bendy straws, which were invented for that specific use in the first place)

And the disabled people who have lost access don’t.

For the sake of an item that constituted 0.003% of ocean plastics, and giving you a “win” you’re further supporting the exclusion and marginalisation of disabled people.

Banning plastic straws did less than nothing to improve the environment (less than, because it made people like you think they’ve done their part, and focus less on the actual problem), and worse, it sprung up an entire multi billion dollar industry that makes and sells reusable straws that end up in landfill just as often, and will be staying there for significantly longer.

You getting a dopamine hit doesn’t make something good or right.

The thing though is they replaced polluting single use straws with less polluting single use straws.

Single use straws only ever constituted 0.003% of ocean plastics, they were already less polluting than pretty much any other plastic in use today, and the alternatives are not suitable for many disabled people for many different reasons. The ban also removed accessibility, and put the burden on disabled people (and on retail staff to gatekeep us, which more often than not resulted in service being denied).

If they actually wanted to do something useful it would have been nice to have multi-use straws ie. metal/wood/or even hardened plastic. But I guess that wouldn’t be as suitable a source of income, and wouldn’t fit well with american consumerism and fast food culture, so here we are debating on the best type of single use straws.

They did, they literally created an entire multi billion dollar industry to make money off of the problem they created, and the virtue signalers flocked to buy reusable straws, which again, are not suitable for many disabled people who depend on single use bendy straws for literal survival.

As you said, the base problem comes from capitalism.

It is, stop getting distracted by the bullshit capitalists tell you so that they can sell you more shit.

The attack on single use straws was entirely symbolic (end completely useless) in the first place, and harmful for disabled people.

The problem was never straws, it was, and is, capitalism.

Focus on that, don’t get drawn in to the superficial virtue signalling divisive and harmful distractions.

Na, he’s only playing the one side - his own. Always has, always will. All billionaires do, that’s how they ended up that way.

Retail giant Monsoon’s CEO calls on UK to scrap tax loopholes benefitting competition, so he can continue to exclusively use them himself

FTFY

The CEO, like all CEO’s is concerned with his own companies profit margin, noting else, but especially not “fairness”.

Jfc, where the fuck does the author thinks consumerism comes from? Who do they think it serves? Why is it so fucking hard for some people to say “capitalism is the root cause of the destruction of the planet”??!!

It’s exhausting…

Well done, that’s exactly what those actually responsible and who are causing all the damage, and making all the money, want you to think. It’s worse than useless, it’s actively counterproductive, and serves to keep people busy with superficial nonsense that will never make a dent, while they continue to pillage all the resources.

At best, the person who wrote this demonstrates a vast misunderstanding of the scale of the problem, and either way, their piece serves those in power, not the cause against them.

As Labour touts more brutal cuts to benefits, how is this different from life under the Tories?

It isn’t, just like we said it wouldn’t be before the election, when the cultists refused to listen.

Keith and his cronies are nothing but establishment serving placeholders and future scapegoats for the right to blame for all the ills of society and come back in stronger and more fascist than ever. And when that happens, the cultists will act all surprised and bewildered again because they simply refuse to hear anything that contradicts their deep indoctrination in to passive compliance with the rules.

As for

There may be no nasty impulse to punish ‘skivers’

If you genuinely believe that, you’re not been paying any attention, or are completely oblivious to the masses of ableist and classist dog whistles they’ve been using all along.

Is it really a wonder why we get so much more frustrated with liberals who insist on playing along and cooperating with the system, insisting they care about society and its most vulnerable (to stroke their own egos) while refusing to listen to our warnings (again, to stroke their own egos, after all, they still see us as beneath them), than we are with those who are at least honest about throwing us under the bus? Once again MLK’s quote about white moderates being a bigger barrier to equity than the KKK are proves its depressing accuracy.

You do realise that many people (significantly more since covid in fact) are on benefits because we can’t work, right? And it’s those benefits (disability, employment support) that are getting the worst cuts.

So you’re not technically wrong, but your solution also doesn’t help those of us most targeted.

Critics argue that the agency’s work with a lobbying group is a conflict of interest.

Then these critics don’t understand the relationship between state and capitalism, because it is in fact serves both parties interests quite well, by design.

The state doesn’t exist for the benefit of society.

In case anyone is unfamiliar - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institut_für_Sexualwissenschaft#Nazi_era

A. air travel isn’t “psychotic”, fuck off with that ableism and

B. he wouldn’t be doing it once, he would be doing it 0.00000000000000001% of a time

So again:

spare me the “every little help” platitude, at the scales we’re discussing here, this person’s itinerary makes zero difference, and only serves to alleviate his personal guilt.

And apparently, some of yours, too!

So I’m glad he was compensated, but I struggle to take his stance seriously when he works for a neoliberal think tank and genuinely believes his personal travel arrangements make any difference whatsoever when someone like him should definitely be aware that billionaires emit more carbon pollution in 90 minutes than the average person does in a lifetime (spare me the “every little help” platitude, at the scales we’re discussing here, this person’s itinerary makes zero difference, and only serves to alleviate his personal guilt. The only difference we can make as individuals is to unite and tear down the systems that are actually destroying the planet, and the people responsible).

Oh yeah, they wouldn’t have scrapped it unless it was damaging them somehow (like you say, or possibly by being so transparent they couldn’t even muster any plausible deniability), rather than benefits claimants, as intended.

Thank fuck for miniature, and no doubt temporary, fucking mercies.

The human-run system is already designed to reject as many claims as possible and make it as absolutely difficult as possible for those they don’t flat out reject to get even the lowest rate (again, the default, which, like a rejection, you then have to appeal to get what you’re really entitled to), yet somehow AI would have managed to make it worse.

Don’t think for a second this’ll stop them from trying again, or making the existing system worse still in other ways.

After all, we are the real leeches on the government tax pot that they need to eliminate, not their fellow landlords and capitalists sat next to them on the parliament bench. 🙄