Board index › Topical Discussion › Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

The Ugly Penalty

Page 4 of 4 [ 51 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4

Previous topic | Next topic

Should ugliness be considered a disability (legally)?
Yes! People should not be allowed to discriminate against the ugly. 31%  31%  [ 5 ]
No! I hate ugly people. They deserve all the abuse they get. 25%  25%  [ 4 ]
Oh look, SHEEP! .... I mean chupacabras! AARRRGGGGHHH! MY GOATS ARE SUCKED! 44%  44%  [ 7 ]
Total votes : 16

GoonSquad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 May 2007
Age: 55
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,748
Location: International House of Paincakes...

09 Feb 2014, 12:27 pm

ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo wrote:
Actually he is most likely getting a grant that's why most studies happen. To get grant money. Go figure.
I mean look at Donald Trump. Look at most politicians. Do you really think many of them are good looking? People say JFK was but to me he isn't. Am I missing something?
There is not one politician from my state I would call attractive.


That sort of thinking has been fostered by the Right so that they can dismiss things like evolution and climate change. That's really a cynical, BS mindset.

Just because he might have gotten a grant, doesn't mean his conclusions were bought. Believe it or not, most academics and funders of academics do have integrity.

Also, legitimate academic studies go through a process of peer review. People in academics tend to be competitive and if there's a flaw in a study, they are very happy to point it out. Invalid, BS studies won't stand up for long, and researchers who produce them can find themselves out of a job pretty quickly.

I'm sorry if these studies clash with your worldview. You can offer-up all the personal anecdotes, and observations you like, but they won't invalidate the findings in these studies.

If you want me to take you seriously, find another study that disputes the findings I linked to at the begging of this thread.


_________________
No man is free who is not master of himself.~Epictetus


Kurgan
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Apr 2012
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,132
Location: Scandinavia

09 Feb 2014, 3:13 pm

GoonSquad wrote:
Kurgan wrote:
GoonSquad wrote:
Kurgan wrote:
thomas81 wrote:
it depends whether or not the ugliness is severe enough to be classed as a deformity. In that case, yes i think a case could be argued.

I've also wondered if having a significantly low IQ should in its own right, be or is classed as a disability.


It is if it's below 70, a person will automatically get disability benefits if he applies for them. However, someone with an IQ of 75, won't survive on his own in a regular, non-sheltered job either these days. Out of 5.1 million people in Norway, only 39 are in regular jobs--and just two of them are full-time employed.

With that being said, while someone with an IQ of 85 can't become an engineer, he can become a forklift operator and at least provide for himself.


I know a man with an IQ of 62 who has a wife, children and supports them with a job.

IQ scores are... slippery.


I also know of a case who worked as a licensed truck driver who was diagnosed as mentally ret*d, but his diagnosis was set on him when he was 7 years old, and there was currently very little linking him to that diagnosis.

Keep in mind that many who are mentally challenged and work, do so in sheltered conditions, where they receive a very small paycheck next to their disability pensions.


The guy I'm talking about was tested as an adult by the USMC on his way to Vietnam... He boasted of having the second lowest IQ in the Marine Corps, really.

When I knew him, he was working in a very dangerous industrial environment. His job was fairly simple and repetitive though.

He didn't have any problems. He couldn't read or do math, but he could follow verbal instructions pretty well.


Impressive, in that case. Nevertheless, he probably started working a very long time ago, since you mentioned Vietnam and the fact that he was illiterate (most with an IQ of 62 can read these days).



ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 18 Jun 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 12,265

09 Feb 2014, 5:54 pm

GoonSquad wrote:
ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo wrote:
Actually he is most likely getting a grant that's why most studies happen. To get grant money. Go figure.
I mean look at Donald Trump. Look at most politicians. Do you really think many of them are good looking? People say JFK was but to me he isn't. Am I missing something?
There is not one politician from my state I would call attractive.


That sort of thinking has been fostered by the Right so that they can dismiss things like evolution and climate change. That's really a cynical, BS mindset.

Just because he might have gotten a grant, doesn't mean his conclusions were bought. Believe it or not, most academics and funders of academics do have integrity.

Also, legitimate academic studies go through a process of peer review. People in academics tend to be competitive and if there's a flaw in a study, they are very happy to point it out. Invalid, BS studies won't stand up for long, and researchers who produce them can find themselves out of a job pretty quickly.

I'm sorry if these studies clash with your worldview. You can offer-up all the personal anecdotes, and observations you like, but they won't invalidate the findings in these studies.

If you want me to take you seriously, find another study that disputes the findings I linked to at the begging of this thread.

I am not saying studies are complete hogwash just there's two sides to every coin and you cannot see both at once :cyclops: